During the first few years of the twenty-first century, Americans have already contended with a remarkable amount of political and economic tumult, ranging from the Sept. 11 attacks to the collapse of the 1990s economic boom to military conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Uneasiness and caution have ruled the financial decision-making of many American households. Now, recently released statistics from the Barna Research Group indicate that this pervasive apprehension may have contributed to a dramatic one-year decrease in the number of American homes that tithe to their churches.

Barna's data shows that only 3 percent of adults contributed 10 percent of their 2002 income to churches, which marks a 62 percent decrease from 2001 when 8 percent of American adults tithed. Among born-again Christians, the decline was similarly steep, from 14 percent in 2001 to 6 percent in 2002. Barna attributes the sudden drop to a variety of factors, including the soft economy and ongoing terrorism threat. But he also pegs shifting church demographics—younger adults don't share their parents' and grandparents' convictions about tithing.

This generation seems not so much put off as mystified by the concept. Their questions are honest enough: "Who came up with the figure of ten percent? Why should we take this figure as authoritative? Isn't tithing legalism?" Here, as in most churchly matters, a bit of history can go a long way.

Most discussions of tithing begin with the Old Testament precedent, first recorded in Genesis 14:20. After winning an astounding victory in battle and retrieving his nephew Lot along with all his lost possessions, Abram thanked God by giving Melchizedek one-tenth of all he had. Then, in Numbers 18:21, we find tithing included in the Mosaic Law. Its purpose was to provide for the Levites, whom God wanted to concentrate on priestly duties.

While the New Testament contains no explicit command to tithe, many have argued that this relationship between the Levites and the other tribes of Israel prefigures how Christians should provide for their ministers. This view of tithing, known as parallelism, gained prominence in the church around the sixth century.

Many non-Jewish and pre-Christian societies also practiced tithing-like giving. Some ancient sources describe how kings imposed a type of first-fruits tax to maintain holy shrines and support clergy. From Nebuchadnezzar's Babylonia to the temples of Apollo in Delphi and Athena in Athens, pre-Christian centers of worship collected tithes for their gods. Ancient cultures as disparate as the Greeks and Chinese—including the Arabians, Phoenicians, Romans, and Carthaginians—gave in ways mirroring the tithe. Some scholars believe ancient cultures hit on the seemingly arbitrary figure of one-tenth because they often did calculations on their fingers.



The early church's views on tithing foreshadowed many of today's stewardship debates. The Eastern Church began tithing out of obligation because they believed Jesus' conversation with the rich young man demanded sacrificial generosity. Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus pleaded with the church to surpass even the Old Testament tithe since Christ had freed them from the Law.

Later church fathers—John Chrysostom, Cyprian, Origen, and Augustine among them—complained from time to time that their followers lacked Christian charity. Chrysostom even shamed his stingy church for marveling at those who tithed. He contrasted their amazement with the dutiful giving of Old Testament Jews.

The early church's expectation that every Christian would tithe found formal expression at the Synod of Mâçon in 585, which embedded the practice in canon law. A millennium later, the Council of Trent sharpened this law's teeth: it provided for excommunication if any Catholic declined to contribute his tithe. This, despite the stain in the Church's monetary record that Luther had so recently uncovered in his critique of papal indulgences.

Post-Reformation Europe, however, didn't do much better: in the centuries after Luther, secular governments often acted on behalf of the churches by collecting mandatory tithes. These more closely resembled American property taxes than Jewish monetary offerings.

Without a state-imposed tithe, giving in the United States developed quite differently than in Europe. American church leaders have often emphasized the New Testament's command to give freely and cheerfully, which some leaders have cited to advocate giving less or even more than ten percent. As a result, tithing has been practiced only sporadically in the modern church, though some revival has been seen in recent decades among Baptists and elements of the Wesleyan holiness movement and Pentecostalism.

Still, Barna's new research reveals that the vast majority of Christians apparently remain unmoved by the message of John Bunyan's couplet: "There was a man, some called him mad; The more he gave, the more he had."

Let us now see how the doctrine of tithing got started in the first place. Tithing can best be appraised by considering its historical development within the biblical records. Once this is comprehended, everything concerning tithing can then be understood.

The first striking fact concerning tithing is that the Scripture has remarkably little to say about it prior to the Book of Leviticus written in the time of Moses. The first eleven chapters of Genesis (the first book of the Bible) cover a span of some 2,000 years. While sacrifices and several other rituals are mentioned, the subject of tithing never emerged as a topic of discussion.

The initial illustration in the Bible about any tithing concerns the account of Abraham and Melchizedek in Genesis chapter 14. Following the slaughter of the kings, Abraham returned to central Palestine with his nephew named Lot, the other captives, and with a large amount of spoil that was taken from the northern kings (verses 16–17). Abraham then met Melchizedek and gave him a tenth of the spoil. "He gave him tithes of all" (verse 20). The remainder of the captured goods was given to the king of Sodom (verses 21–24).

Consider this action of Abraham. There is no agreement whatever with the law of tithing later revealed in the Book of Leviticus. Indeed, Moses required that the tithe be paid only on the increase of the land and animals (Leviticus 27:30–31). But with Abraham, he did not work to produce any of the spoil he had recovered. Spoil does not represent an increase from farms or ranches. There was no biblical teaching which showed that Abraham was required to give a tenth of the spoil to Melchizedek.

Actually, much later in the time of Moses, the Israelites were informed what should be done with any spoil they might capture from their enemies such as that which Abraham captured in his day. Such spoil was not to be tithed as shown in the law of Moses. When the Israelites obtained spoil from the Midianites, Moses insisted that the priests receive 1/500th of the goods from those who had gone to war—not 1/10th as a tithe would require (Numbers 31:9, 27–29). The Levites got more booty. They received 1/50th of the congregation’s half of the spoil (verse 30). Again, the law concerning "spoils" in war had nothing to do with the later ordained tithe.

But let us again consider the action of Abraham. If Moses was recording in Genesis a universal law of tithing when he wrote about Abraham giving a tenth of his spoils to Melchizedek, why does he depart from that very law some 400 years later with a completely different set of figures? In truth, Abraham was not following any law of tithing on spoil or on anything else. Abraham’s tenth was only in the nature of a voluntary (free will) offering of thanksgiving to God for the deliverance of his people from captivity.

If more evidence of the voluntary nature of tithing is needed before the time of Moses, the account of Jacob’s tithing provides it.

"And Jacob vowed a vow, saying: ‘If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come back to my father’s house in peace, then shall the Lord be my God ... and of all that you shall give me I will surely give the tenth unto you."

• Genesis 28:20–22 [emphasis mine]

If tithing were an inexorable law intended for all peoples and for all periods of time as many preachers state, this procedure of Jacob is truly a paradoxical case. This is because Jacob put the word "IF" into his contract he was making with God. That "IF" made the contract to be contingent on God performing something for Jacob. Jacob’s use of the word "IF" takes his contract away from being in the category of a well known universal law. No one treats known laws in such a fashion. That would be like a person saying to God: "If you bless my business during the first six days of the week, then I will close it and rest on the Sabbath." One does not slight the laws of God by putting the word "IF" at the beginning of them. But it would not be wrong to think in that fashion if a voluntary thanksgiving offering were under consideration. The "IF" in the vow makes the tenth that Jacob said he would pay to be a free will offering and his promise was even conditional. As clear as it can be, both Abraham and Jacob were the ones who set the parameters, not God!

There is further proof that tithing as a universal principle was not in force before the time of Moses. Look at the example of Jacob’s son Joseph.
While in Egypt he was inspired to interpret Pharaoh’s dreams about seven full and seven lean years for harvests. As a result of Joseph’s wisdom and because the Spirit of God was in him (Genesis 41:38–39), Pharaoh made him ruler over all the land of Egypt. For seven years they gathered in the harvests and stored the grain. When the lean years came, the Egyptians used all their money to purchase some of the grain reserves (Genesis 47:14–15). They then sold Joseph all their cattle to buy the needed grain (verse 16). Finally, they even bartered their own bodies and all their land for food (verse 18–20).

This meant that Pharaoh, through the advice of the patriarch Joseph, came to possess all things found in Egypt. At this point notice what Joseph did,

"Then Joseph said unto the people, ‘Behold, I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh: lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land. And it shall come to pass in the increase, that you shall give the fifth part unto Pharaoh, and four parts shall be your own, for seed of the field, and for your food, and for them of your households, and for food for your little ones.’"

• Genesis 47:23–24

This command was nothing like that given by Moses some 200 years later. Moses stated that a tenth of the increase had to be set aside for the Levites. But Joseph said no such thing. He declared that two-tenths (a fifth part) was to be Pharaoh’s for his own personal use, while all the remainder went to the people. Joseph did not give any priesthood a part of the increase that some so-called universal law of tithing might require. Actually, the priests of the time had their own lands which had not been sold to Pharaoh. These produced enough food for their own sustenance and no tithes were ever exacted from them (verses 22, 26).

Joseph in his day knew nothing of any so-called universal tithing laws—simply because none existed. On the other hand, since Joseph was one who respected his father Jacob with utmost esteem, he would have known about Abraham’s tithing example and the conditional tithe of Jacob, yet in Egypt Joseph avoided using any tithe. This was not an act of disobedience because he was "a man in whom the Spirit of God is" (Genesis 41:38). Joseph said nothing about giving a tenth of the increase to any priesthood, simply because there was no universal tithing law prior to Moses.

Moses and Tithing

In the time of Moses, God finally ordained a tithing system as part of the laws he gave to Israel. There were, however, several events involving the payment of monies for sacred purposes which occurred before the introduction of tithing. It is worthwhile to consider them in this historical survey about the origin of tithing.

Just prior to Israel’s exodus from Egypt, God told them to spoil the Egyptians (Exodus 12:35). Spoil is the booty of war. Since God as Israel’s military commander had won the war over the Egyptians in Egypt, God told Israel to take the booty (the spoil) that now belonged to them. There is no evidence that the Israelites once they obtained the spoil gave a tenth of it to anyone. For one thing, there was at that time no authorized priesthood among the Israelites to take tithe on God’s behalf. And even if there were, the accumulation of these things was reckoned as spoil of war, not income or compensation. Moses ordained a different set of laws for spoil, as previously explained. Thus, the law of tithing was not in operation when the Israelites first left Egypt.

Then, about three months later at Mount Sinai, the Old Covenant with the Ten Commandments was first given to the Israelites (Exodus chapter 20). It also embraced many other laws recorded in four chapters—unto the end of Exodus chapter 23. These were laws of the Old Covenant which Israel promised to observe (Exodus 24:3–. These four chapters contained nothing less than the basic constitution which was intended to govern Israel. The Bible calls the contents of those four chapters the Book of the Covenant. Remarkably, there is not one hint of tithing as a requirement in this basic teaching of the Old Covenant. Some might consider this an oversight on Moses’ part because there surely was a need to finance the new national existence of Israel.

True enough, Moses was well aware that the accumulation of revenues was needed to perform the Old Covenant requirements that had been recently ordained at Mount Sinai. Tithing, however, was not the method that Moses used at this early period. He had another way of securing the necessary funds to operate the civil and religious institutions associated with the new nation of Israel. Moses simply asked for some free will offerings. When Moses petitioned Israel for money to build the Tabernacle, here is what happened:

"Men and women, as many as were willing hearted, brought bracelets, and earrings, and rings, and tablets, all jewels of gold and ... the children of Israel brought a willing offering unto the Lord ... They brought yet unto him [Moses] free offerings every morning ... the stuff they had was sufficient for all the work to make it, and too much."

• Exodus 35:22, 29; 36:3, 7 [italics mine]

The Israelites had taken much spoil from the Egyptians. When it became necessary to raise funds to build the Tabernacle, Moses asked the Israelites to give free will offerings from these and other possessions. The Old Covenant society which Moses established at Mount Sinai, whether religious or secular, was supported solely (at first) by free will contributions. This is precisely the way the early Christians financed their activities (we will see this later). There was no law of tithing that was being applied in the building of the holy sanctuary (the Tabernacle). As a matter of fact, tithing was not understood as a necessary thing by Moses until almost a year later (Leviticus 27:30–33).

In concluding this historical survey, it should be noted that for the first two thousand and five hundred years of human history (as recorded in the biblical narrative) the only two instances of tithing were involving free will offerings of Abraham and Jacob. And even in the first period of the Exodus, Moses only required free will contributions from the Israelites. But true enough, a year passed in the Wilderness, then Moses saw the need for a law of tithing. Let us now look in the next chapter at the laws that Moses ordained for Israel.

God did not command Adam to tithe,  nor is it mentioned that Adam tithe of his own accord. Cain and Abel learned to sacrifice from Adam, to give an offering that was to be of blood not something that was from the work of their own hands (Genesis 4), but they did not tithe. Job, whom we have much detail of his life lived in the (pre?) Abrahamic period. He sacrificed but there is no mention of tithing. Considering how inventive some of the promoters of seed faith giving are today, it is surprising they have not found this the cause of Job’s affliction. You would think that Job would have needed to give something to remove Satan’s hand of attack against himself. Yet, the Bible is silent on this matter.

The fact remains-- there is no mention of giving any tenth of goods to a person, priest or God UNTIL Abraham. Lets go back to this first incident and examine carefully what took place. What we need to do is look at what exactly transpired with Abraham to see if this is the origin of the tithe as some of the prosperity seed-faith teacher’s claim.

In Genesis 14 we have the first reference to tithing and this pre-dates the Mosaic Law. This was a unique incident and relates to a special person at a certain time. Gen 14:17-20: “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.”

This is the first time a tithe is mentioned in the Bible. Did Abram tithe of all that he possessed? No. The first thing you find is that the “everything” mentioned did not belong to Abram. It was the property of other people, including Abram’s nephew Lot, who was captured by the armies of the kings. Abram gave away ten per cent of other people’s captured goods. It was thanksgiving offering to God on behalf of the people who had been miraculously rescued.

Lets step back a few verses. Genesis 14:16:  ”And he brought back all the goods, and also brought again his brother Lot, and his goods, and the women also, and the people.”

After rescuing his nephew Lot from the alliance of the kings with Chedorlaomer he gave Melchizedek, king of Salem a tenth of everything that he plundered. It was from the spoils of war. That was what the tithe came from. Abra[ha]m did not tithe from his personal possessions but the spoils of war.  And that is exactly what the New Testament says Hebrews 7:4:  ”Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.” A tithe was on what you earned, it was from your vocation (Lev. 27:30; Deut. 14:22-23,28; 2 Chron.31:5-6.)

Abram and his small group of his servants went to battle these armies and won. Melchizedek the high priest of Salem recognized that God had granted this miraculous victory (v.20). He owned none of the property in question before the battle but was entitled to have the spoils as the victor. The king of Sodom even offered Abram the goods “Now the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the persons, and take the goods for yourself.” (Gen. 14:21) Abram’s reply v.22-23, “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.”

In fact it seems to me that Abram gave all

Do you know of anyone who would do this that is into tithing for prosperity? But Abram refused to take any of it: “I will not take anything that is yours …” (v.23). The spoils he repossessed from the enemy kings went back to the owners, Abraham gave the remaining 90% in his possession back to those to whom it originally belonged.

This event is NOT a tithe by command but a free will offering. Abraham was never taught or instructed by God to give a tenth, nor did he discover the law of tithing like he did of circumcision .

This was a one time only event in his life. Abraham is recorded giving this tithe only ONCE in his lifetime. Abraham had not tithed of his own property or income, though at this time he was very wealthy and could do so He did not keep going back to Melchizedek to give.

The idea of tithing to get something more by Abraham is not supported, he already had the goods. He gave them back. This has nothing in common with the teaching of seed faith giving, offering what you do not have, or that you should give ten per cent of your gross weekly income to anointed men or ministries for God’s blessings to come to you. If Abraham was being blessed through the tithing system, as some claim, why did he do this only once? He never repeated it again for the rest of his life, and neither did he teach this to any of his sons.

According to the Bible tithing does not become a command until Moses’ time. This is ignored by today’s lawful tithers. Instead it is replaced by clever teaching on Abraham’s tithe to make it a requirement for the church.

Abram gave a tenth to Melchizedek before the law of Moses as an act of faith in thanksgiving for his victory, it was not about income. In Genesis 14:20 The Hebrew word for tithe is ma`aser, translated “tenth,” but tenth does not equal tithing, (though a certain tithe is a tenth, again the whole tithe for Israel was much more-- 22%). Even if we were to find tithing before the law this still would not prove tithing is to be continued after the Cross when the new covenant was established.

The tithe was incorporated in the Mosaic law, it was to train a nation to trust their God. A tithe can be a tenth of anything. Ten percent of; fruit trees, crops, oil, wine, garden, livestock, land, houses (according to 2 Kings 22:15-18), and it was not something you chose out of all you had, you had to give the best of everything. Therefore, if you have a number of parcels of land, and you were to tithe, you must give your best acreage. If you have built your house on it, kiss it goodbye. That is tithing according to the Bibles teaching. (Prov. 3:9-10; Exod. 23:19; Deut. 18:4; Num. 18:12-13). The next time a prosperity teacher solicits your best, ask him what best he has given in the last week. They are the ones that own land and houses and cars, what did they give from these?

Just because a tenth is mentioned does not mean it is a tithe. We need to go back to when God first instituted it as a requirement of law for the people. We find the Bible states the Law came through Moses not Abraham (Jn.1). Moses introduced the tithe because of the priesthood and the sacrificial system as Israel was to be a theocracy. Leviticus 27:30: “And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD'S: it is holy unto the LORD.  Verse 34: “These are the commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai.” Numbers 18:21-26: “Thus speak unto the Levites, and say unto them, When ye take of the children of Israel the tithes which I have given you from them for your inheritance, then ye shall offer up an heave offering of it for the LORD, even a tenth part of the tithe.”

The nation of Israel lived by their agriculture (Husbandry) and depended upon the rain. God’s blessing in relation to the tithe had to do with his provision of water; no rain and they would starve (Mal.3). If they did not give God their tithes which was part of the conditional blessing in the Mosaic covenant God would bring a curse upon them, the ground would not yield food because he would not allow it to rain. Tithing was Israel’s moral obligation in order for God to bless the work of their hands. 

Did Jacob Tithe?

Genesis 28: 20:  ”And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, So that I come again to my father’s house in peace; then shall the LORD be my God: And this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God’s house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.”

Does Jacob giving God a tenth prove that tithing was practiced before Moses? NO. Jacob vowed a vow to God for safe passage, for food and clothing and this promise was conditional. Tithing was not a conditional act, it was like a tax for the nation Israel. Again this is one time occurrence, it is never mentioned again in Jacob’s life. There was no Levitical priesthood or tabernacle that would be necessary for a tithe. Just because a tenth is mentioned does not mean it is a tithe. Tithing is something you do regularly not on a conditional basis, not once in a lifetime nor once a year.

God had Moses introduce the tithe because of the priesthood and the sacrificial system and Israel being a theocracy. If tithing was before the Law then it should apply apart from the Law. The Bible says that tithing was of the Law 400 years after Abraham. The Bible does not say that Abraham was commanded to give a tithe; the Bible does not say that Jacob was commanded to give a tithe. In fact, before Moses and the Law, the Bible does not record anyone giving tithes to God as a yearly, Monthly or weekly practice. There is No such command.

If Christians are to be practicing tithing today because of Abraham then we are also obligated to keep everything that occurred before the law! Circumcision was given to Abraham before it was incorporated in the Law of Moses.

Abraham and Jacob were circumcised because God told them to.

By the same standard of tithing, if circumcision was practiced before the Law then circumcision should be practiced after the Law.

The same observance applied to tithing should be applied to circumcision. However the New Testament says that circumcision was of the Law and need not to be observed by Christians, we are circumcised in our heart when we believe in Jesus (Paul says in Galatians 3 not to keep the law).

Does God still require 10% of your money today? (remember tithing was not money, in fact it rarely was and money existed those days). The word “tithe” is used 13 times in the Bible. Not once do you see the word “money” used with it. The word “tithes” is used 21 times in the Bible. The word “money” is not mentioned.  It has become this because of our system we use today, but this was not strictly so for Israel. 2 Chronicles 31:4-5: “Moreover he commanded the people who dwelt in Jerusalem to contribute support for the priests and the Levites, that they might devote themselves to the Law of the LORD. As soon as the commandment was circulated, the children of Israel brought in abundance the firstfruits of grain and wine, oil and honey, and of all the produce of the field; and they brought in abundantly the tithe of everything.”

Giving a tithe (a portion) was not just a practice by Israel, in ancient history it was practiced throughout the Middle East. It was income for the king and his kingdom, like a tax. It may be regular, voluntary or prescribed by law of a certain country. The Egyptians were required to give a fifth part of their crops to Pharaoh (Gen. 47:24). Abraham, Jacob and others were familiar with this principle being in foreign lands; however, it was not yet given as a command for their nation.

The total giving required amount of giving was not 10 percent (that was specific tithe), but over 22% for the nation. All the goods were used to operate the nation; tithing was instituted by God to support Israel as a theocratic state.

SO WHAT TITHING ARE YOU, IF IT ISN'T THE BIBLICAL 23.3% TITHE?

The Jewish Historian Alfred Edersheim seems to have done a fair bit of research on this subject. Basically, the subject is far more complex than a simple 10%, and would usually have amounted to more under Old Testament law. In fact, I am not sure I fully understand what Edersheim has explained—but that helps to convey just how complex it really was.

The basic idea of the tithe (i.e 10%) was bound up in the first fruit offerings of the land:

Two of these firstfruit offerings were public and national; viz. the first omer, on the second day of the Passover, and the wave-loaves at Pentecost. The other two kinds of ‘firstfruits’—or Reshith, ‘the first, the beginning’—were offered on the part of each family and of every individual who had possession in Israel, according to the Divine directions in Ex. 22:29; 23:19; 34:26; Numb. 15:20, 21; 18:12, 13; Deut. 18:4; and Deut. 26:2–11, where the ceremonial to be observed in the Sanctuary is also described. Authorities distinguish between the Biccurim (primitiva), or firstfruits offered in their natural state, and the Terumoth (primitae), brought not as raw products, but in a prepared state,—as flour, oil, wine, etc. The distinction is convenient, but not strictly correct, since the Terumoth also included vegetables and garden produce. (The Temple - Its Ministry and Services as they were at the time of Christ, by Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889), chap. 19, p. 379)
However, these first fruits and their offerings were complex in the traditional regulations and were largely based on being actually from the Holy Land:

They must be the produce of the Holy Land itself, in which, according to tradition, were included the ancient territories of Og and Sihon, as well as that part of Syria which David had subjugated. On the other hand, both the tithes and the Terumoth were also obligatory on Jews in Egypt, Babylon, Ammon, and Moab. The Biccurim were only presented in the Temple, and belonged to the priesthood there officiating at the time, while the Terumoth might be given to any priest in any part of the land. The Mishnah holds that, as according to Deut. 8:8 only the following seven were to be regarded as the produce of the Holy Land, from them alone Biccurim were due: viz. wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, olives, and dates. If the distance of the offerer from Jerusalem was too great, the figs and grapes might be brought in a dried state. . . .

Of course, neither tithes, nor Biccurim, nor Terumoth, were to be given of what already belonged to the Lord, nor of what was not fairly the property of a person. Thus if only the trees, but not the land in which they grew, belonged to a man, he would not give firstfruits. (The Temple - Its Ministry and Services as they were at the time of Christ, by Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889), chap. 19, p. 379)
In the end, when all requirements were considered, the actual amount to be given was more than just the tithe, and would have been around 25% of the overall revenue of the community from the harvests that God caused to be enjoyed:

Thus the prescribed religious contributions of every Jewish layman at the time of the second Temple were as follows:
Biccurim and Terumoth, say two per cent.;

from the ‘first of the fleece,’ at least five shekels’ weight;

from the ‘first of the dough,’ say four per cent.;

‘corners of the fields’ for the poor, say two per cent.;

the first, or Levitical tithe, ten per cent.;

the second, or festival tithe, to be used at the feasts in Jerusalem,

and in the third and sixth years to be the ‘poor’s tithe,’ ten per cent.;

the firstlings of all animals, either in kind or money-value;

five shekels for every first-born son, provided he were the first child of his mother, and free of blemish;

and the half-shekel of the Temple-tribute.

Together, these amounted to certainly more than the fourth of the return which an agricultural population would have. And it is remarkable, that the Law seems to regard Israel as intended to be only an agricultural people—no contribution being provided for from trade or merchandise.

Besides these prescribed, there were, of course, all manner of voluntary offerings, pious works, and, above all, the various sacrifices which each, according to his cirumstances or piety, would bring in the Temple at Jerusalem. (The Temple - Its Ministry and Services as they were at the time of Christ, by Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889), chap. 19, p. 379)
Edersheim makes it very clear that the Mosaic Laws did not apply to all income, and assumed an agricultural society, clearly dating some aspects of God's purposes for the Mosaic Law:

And it is remarkable, that the Law seems to regard Israel as intended to be only an agricultural people—no contribution being provided for from trade or merchandise. (The Temple - Its Ministry and Services as they were at the time of Christ, by Alfred Edersheim (1825-1889), chap. 19, p. 379)

When we look to the New Testament we can't [/b]draw real parallels from the Old, for the intention was to support a government as well as the church. In a sense this means that under the Old Testament, [b]once taxes and church offerings were paid, 75% of most peoples income was left. Of this, people could still make free will offerings.

As the original society under Moses in the desert would not have necessarily had any currency, most payments for other services were probably made with produce from the land: meats, etc. (although in some cases silver may have been in use). It is therefore somewhat natural that a tradition under the Old Testament of paying a generic 10% for the tithe on 'all that one earned' is understandable (Ref. Luke 18:12; Genesis 14:18-20), though not really arguable directly from scripture.

To answer the question more specifically by date, as it was first established within Christianity under Catholicism, I refer to a Catholic Encyclopedia that established it around 567 AD:

The payment of tithes was adopted from the Old Law, and early writers speak of it as a divine ordinance and an obligation of conscience. 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 Maçon in 585. In course of time, we find the payment of tithes made obligatory by ecclesiastical enactments in all the countries of christendom.
By the "Old Law" the text means Mosaic Law. As far as the concept of gross versus net goes, this seems to be a more modern idea by hyper-fundamentalists, and I have not yet found its origin.

A study of church history will show that at some point, probably around the year 600, the churches brought back the teaching of tithing, but only as voluntary giving, and still just on the crops, herds, and flocks, right out of the Old Testament.
Since they didn't teach it as a "biblical tithe," they were able to change the rules to make it fit the needs of the church.

By the middle of the 13th century, the Church's claim to tithes was extended to include the poultry of the yard and the cattle of the stall, to the catch of fish and the game of the forests. Had tithing in the Old Testament been on everything as some have claimed, there would have been no need to expand the definition.

My research shows that tithing was first taught and collected by churches in the United States during the second half of the 1800s. Had tithing always been required, why was it not until the late 1800s that the churches in the United States started collecting tithes? And even then, the teaching of tithing was not consistent between churches. It wasn't until recent years that churches started teaching that you tithe on your income, or gross income.

My research shows that during the late 1800s some churches taught that men were to tithe a larger amount than women, that no tithing was required for those under the age of 18, and once you reached the age of 65 you no longer were required to tithe.

At times tithing was based on the value of property owned. Those who didn't own property didn't tithe. They gave freewill offerings.

In one case I found the church council members voted to change tithing to income because it would bring in twice as much money. The problem is, all this was taught as biblical.

In many cases, if not most, today's tithing teacher is merely teaching was he/she was taught. Many who later do their own in-depth research have repented and no longer teach that tithing is required today.

For those interested in the history of the Christian church, you may want to read the book, HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH by Philip Schaff.

The biblical tithe was always on assets that came from God's labor; never on income or anything that came from man's labor.

Nowhere in the Bible are there any examples of anyone tithing on wages. During these biblical times, there were designers, embroiderers, and weavers (Exodus 35:35); manservants, maidservants, hired workers (Leviticus 25:6); plus many other occupations. Nowhere is there an example of any of these other occupations paying a tithe.

There is no example of Jesus tithing on his wages as a carpenter, or Paul tithing on his wages as a tent maker, or even Peter tithing on the fish he caught. ONLY farmers who owned crops and/or animals in herds and flocks tithed.

We believe in generous giving, from the heart, and that the requirement to tithe ended at the cross along with all the other Mosaic laws - THIS IS THE CHRISTIAN FAITH. However, those who disagree and believe that tithing is still required, need to understand that God required tithing of crops and animals, and never on man's income. God said the tithe belonged to Him, and He gave the tithe to the Levites. If you believe the law to tithe is still valid, then you are breaking that law when you give the tithe to your local church.

God said you tithe on crops and animals which are assets, not income, and come from God's labor. Man says you tithe on income, not assets, which comes from man's labor.

God said [/b]the tithe belongs to Him, and He gave it to the Levites.[b] Man says [/b]the tithe belongs to God, and you are to give it to your local church (or other christian establishment).

Deuteronomy 4:2 (NIV):
2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.

Scripture is given by God and not to be changed by man. When man changes the scripture, it is no longer the Word of God. [b]Christians are not to adapt the Bible to the times. Christians are to adapt their life to the Bible.

2 Peter 2:1, 3 (NIV):
1 But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you.
3 In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up.

2 Timothy 4:1-4 (NIV):
1 In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge:
2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction.
3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

The choice is yours. Follow tradition, or follow the Word of God.

Tithes and offerings are principles in the kingdom of God. From days of Abraham who's our father of faith and who's fait we follow. Abraham didn't give 10% as war booty to a king . He gave tithe to Gods high priest because it's a spiritual principle .

What is a biblical tithe?
The word is so common among conservative Christians that everybody thinks that he or she knows exactly what it means. However, a serious problem with understanding tithing appears at the very beginning of this article/topic because of the serious disagreement about the definition of “tithe.” The Hebrew and Greek words for “tithe” both simply mean “a tenth.” However, beyond this simple definition, much ­ difficulty exists in defining the contents of the tithe.
If a legal court case were being held, a working definition would have to be agreed upon by all involved parties before the presentation of a case could ­ proceed. However, since this is not possible, four definitions of “tithe” will be ­ presented. Although many contend for the third definition, this write up will use the fourth, Mosaic Law definition. Even this choice of a working definition will be of great concern to many because of long-standing traditional ideas of the content of the tithe.

The Pagan and General Definition

The first definition of “tithe” is a general all-inclusive definition which is not used in the main portion of this book. The Encyclopedia Americana defines the general tithe as “the tenth part of produce or other income, paid voluntarily or under the compulsion of law for the benefit of religious institutions, the support of priests and pastors, and the relief of those in need.”[1] This definition does not distinguish between ecclesiastical tithes from church laws, personal tithes from trade and agricultural tithes.
 
Encyclopedia of Religion, “In the ancient Near East lie the origins of a sacred offering or payment of a tenth part of stated goods or property to the deity. Often given to the king or to the royal temple, the ‘tenth’ was usually approximate, not exact. The practice is known from Mesopotamia, Syria-Palestine, Greece and as far to the west as the Phoenician city of Carthage.”[2]
 
Westminster Dictionary of the Bible, “A 10th part of one’s income consecrated to God. The separation of a certain proportion of the products of one’s industry or of the spoils of war as tribute to their gods was practiced by various nations of antiquity. The Lydians offered a tithe of their booty (Herod. I, 89). The Phoenicians and Carthaginians sent a tithe annually to the Tyrian Hercules. These tithes might be regular or occasional, voluntary or prescribed by law.”[3]
 
This general tithe is of pagan origin and precedes the Mosaic Law’s tithe by many centuries. In Genesis 41:34 Joseph encouraged the Egyptians to double their tithe in order to cover the lean years. In Genesis 14 Abraham was obligated to pay a tithe from the spoils of war in obedience to the Arab war custom. In New Testament times the Roman Empire received the first tithe of ten percent of grains and twenty percent of fruit trees from its conquered subjects, including Judah.
 
Although an additional full ten percent “spoils of war” tithe was not incorporated into the Mosaic Law, an additional one percent is mentioned in Numbers 31:25-47. Almost every theological commentator discusses this ancient custom in Genesis 14:21, which links it to the tithe in verse 20.


The Tithe as a General Offering

A second definition of “tithe” is most common among moderate and ­ liberal churches which equate tithes with free-will offerings. Members are urged to begin with a small percentage of giving and gradually increase the percentage according to their ability. Among these churches there is little or no reference to an exact compulsory giving of ten percent from gross income as a legal requirement. Since many of the liberal churches assign Adam through Moses to mythology and believe the Pentateuch was written after the exile, they usually base their approach to giving on general principles rather than specific texts.
 
Also, many who hold this position prefer to use “tithe” to refer to “net” income with certain limitations.

They are more likely to say that the poor are not required to give tithes and that tithes are only required from those who make a profit from their labor.

They also are more likely to say that church support is not required from those on bare government pension or welfare. The parents’ first duty is to provide essentials of food, clothing, and housing for their family.


The Tithe as Ten Percent of Gross Income

A third definition of “tithe” is taught among many more conservative and fundamental churches. For these churches “tithe” refers to ten percent of “gross” income and is an expectation from all economic classes, both rich and poor alike. In addition to paying salaries of gospel workers and ­ providing social programs, some smaller churches also use the tithe for building funds and payment of all church debts.

Their position insists that the tithe is an unchanging biblical standard, or eternal moral principle, which reflects the character of God, preceded the Mosaic Law and was, therefore, not abolished by the Mosaic Law.

Exact tithing of ten percent of one’s gross income should be observed by all Christians, and free-will offerings are to be given in addition to the mandatory tithe. Without exception, the tithe must be returned to God first, while other necessities such as shelter, child care, medicine, food, heat, and clothing must be given less priority. The church is obligated to teach tithing because it is a biblical command.
 
This common conservative definition is rejected and refuted in this thread/topic because it fails to consider the correct definition, the purpose, and limitations of the biblical tithe. As mentioned in the introduction, this article deliberately uses many conservative evangelical sources in an attempt to demonstrate that this definition is both legalistic and harmful to the church which should be using much better New Covenant principles.


The Tithe as an Old Covenant Ordinance for Israel

The fourth definition of “tithe” is the precise and narrow Scriptural definition as given in the Mosaic Law in the Old Covenant. The biblical tithe was an ordinance of the Mosaic Law for the use and benefit of national Israel under the Old Covenant.

The full tithe was given to the tribe of Levi, first, in exchange for his loss of land inheritance in Israel and, second, because of his servant service to his brothers in the Levitical house of Aaron who alone served as priests. A tenth of the first tithe was, in turn, given by the Levites to the priests who ministered at the altar.
 
The basic tithe was not to be used for building houses of worship. Since pagan dust defiled, the original tithe consisted solely of the increase of land produce from God’s sanctified land of Israel and from the increase of animals herded on the land of Israel.

Although the tithe could be exchanged for its monetary value, the tithe itself never consisted of money!

A second (and third) tithe was also given to provide food for festival occasions, and to provide welfare food for widows, fatherless, orphans and needy strangers in Israel.


The Contents of the Tithe

A surprising biblical fact is that the poor did not pay tithes, but, instead, received from the tithe. A separate section on the poor discusses this truth. This fact is made especially clear in the gleaning laws and in the purpose of the tithe. Jesus did not tithe, nor did he sin by failing to tithe because he was poor and did not own land or herd animals for his sustenance . The poor were only expected to give free-will offerings to the best of their ability.
 
From the list in this section it is easy to demonstrate that the contents of every recorded tithe found in the Mosaic Law is only from landowners and herdsmen of the land of Israel. This was a totally unexpected, yet very clear, truth about tithing that Bible study with an exhaustive concordance revealed. Also, strange as it may seem, Scriptural tithing was only intended for a society sustained almost wholly by agricultural crops and animal herds.
 
Biblical society included the following occupations: bakers, candle makers, carpenters, clothing makers, hired farm workers, hired herdsmen, hired household servants, jewelry craftsmen, masons, metal craftsmen, musicians, painters, perfume makers, physicians, sculptors, soldiers, tanners, teachers and tent makers. Yet NONE of these professions or products from these professions are included in any list of tithes or tithing! Why not? These sources provided much of the money for head taxes, temple taxes, tribute to foreign conquerors and, of course, free-will offerings. It is inconceivable to think that God simply forgot to include them in the many lists of items to be tithed.
 
We must also remember that the Mosaic Law of the ‘firstborn’ would drive all except the firstborn in a family with four sons off the land within 2-3 generations because the firstborn was to get a double portion of the land inheritance (Deut. 21:17). Those with plots of land too small to ­ sustain a family had to sell their portion to their relative with the larger inheritance. Next, they would work as hired hands on their relatives’ land or move to town and take up a trade. For example, a 1000 acre plot would be divided by four sons into plots of 400; 200; 200; and 200 in the first generation; 160; 80; 80; and 80 after two generations; 32; 16; 16; and 16 after three generations. Thus, continually sub-dividing the land would keep the land-tithe the same, but would seriously reduce the amount of persons paying land-tithes. a titled-land owner paid tithe


Tithe Texts Which Reveal Its Limited Contents

Lev. 27:30, 32 And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is the LORD’s. It is holy to the LORD…. And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passes under the rod, the tenth shall be holy to the LORD.
Num. 18:27 And this your heave offering shall be reckoned to you, as though it were the grain of the threshing-floor, and as the fullness of the wine-press.
Num. 18:28 Thus you also shall offer a heave offering to the LORD of all your tithes, which you receive of the children of Israel; and you shall give thereof the LORD’s heave offering to Aaron the priest.
Deut 12:17 You may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain, or of your wine, or of your oil
Deut. 14:22 You shall truly tithe all the increase of your seed, that the field brings forth year by year.
Deut. 14:23 And you shall eat before the LORD your God, in the place which he shall choose to place his name, the tithe of your grain, of your wine, and of your oil, and the first offspring of your herds and of your flocks, that you may learn to fear the LORD your God always.
Deut. 26:12 When you have made an end of tithing all the tithes of your increase [produce: NIV, RSV] the third year, which is the year of tithing, and have given it to the Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat within your gates, and be filled.
2 Chron. 31:5 And as soon as the commandment was circulated, the children of Israel brought in abundance the firstfruits of grain, wine, and oil, and honey, and of all the increase of the fields; and the tithe of all things they brought in abundantly.
2 Chron. 31:6 And concerning the children of Israel and Judah, that lived in the cities of Judah, they also brought in the tithe of oxen and sheep, and the tithe of holy things which were consecrated to the LORD their God, and laid them by heaps.[4]
Neh. 10:37 And that we should bring the firstfruits of our dough, and our offerings, and the fruit of all manner of trees, of wine and of oil, to the priests, to the chambers of the house of our God, and the tithes of our ground to the Levites, that the same Levites might have the tithes in all the cities of our tillage.
Neh. 13:5 And he had prepared for him a great chamber, where previously they laid the grain offerings, the frankincense, and the vessels, and the tithes of the grain, the new wine, and the oil, which was commanded to be given to the Levites, and the singers, and the porters, and the ­ offerings of the priests.
Mal. 3:10 Bring all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat [food] in my house.
Matt. 23:23 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin….

Tithing Was Not an Eternal Moral Principle
A tradition is not automatically an eternal moral principle merely because is it very old, very common and very widespread.

The fact that tithing was common in much pagan worship before the Bible was written does not make it a moral principle. Idolatry, worship of astrological bodies, child sacrifice, temple prostitution, witchcraft and necromancy are equally very old, very common and very widespread in pagan cultures. The practice of giving is found in natural law, but an exact percentage is not.

Tithing Was Not a Minimum Required from All Old Covenant Israelites
Only those Israelites who earned a livelihood from farming and herding inside Israel were required to tithe under the Mosaic Law. Their increase came from God’s hand. Those whose increase came from their own crafts and skills were not required to tithe products and money. The poor and needy who did not tithe and received from the tithe gave freewill offerings.
 
Tithes Were Not the Same as First-fruits
 
 The first-fruit was a very small amount of the first crop harvest and the first-born was the first offspring of animals. The first-fruit was small enough to fit into a hand-held basket (Deut. 26:1-4, 10; Lev. 23:17; Num. 18:13-17; 2 Chron 31:5a). First-fruit and first-born offerings went directly to the Temple and were required to be totally consumed by ministering priests only inside the Temple (Neh. 10:35-37a; Ex. 23:19; 34:26; Deut. 18:4).
 
Tithes Were Not from Money
 
One argument to support non-food tithing is that money was not universally available and barter from food must have been used for most transactions.  This argument is not biblical. Genesis alone contains “money” in 32 texts and the word occurs 44 times before the tithe is first mentioned in Leviticus 27. The word shekel also appears often from Genesis to Deuteronomy.
 
In fact many centuries before Israel entered Canaan and began tithing food from God’s Holy Land money was an essential everyday item. For example money in the form of silver shekels paid for slaves (Gen 17:12+); land (Gen 23:9+); freedom (Ex 23:11); court fines (Ex 21 all; 22 all); sanctuary dues (Ex 30:12+); vows (Lev 27:3-7); poll taxes (Num 3:47+), alcoholic drinks (Deu 14:26) and marriage dowries (Deu 22:29).
 
According to Genesis 47:15-17 food was only used for barter after money had been spent. Banking and usury laws exist in God’s Word in Leviticus even before tithing. Therefore the argument that money was not prevalent enough for everyday use is false. Yet the tithe contents never include money from non-food products and trades.


Examples of Many Authorities Who Agree on This Definition of Tithe

Anchor Bible Dictionary, ‘tithe,’ C. Early Judaism and Christianity, says, “Whereas in the OT tithes apply to specific agricultural products, rabbinic and patristic exegesis tends to include all agricultural products, and eventually [much later] all forms of income as subject to the tithe.”

 

Alfred Edersheim: “And it is remarkable, that the Law seems to regard Israel as intended to be only an agricultural people—no contribution being provided for from trade or merchandise.”[5]

 

Fausset’s Bible Dictionary: “The tithe of all produce as also of flocks and cattle belonged to Jehovah.”[6]

 

Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary: “The law of Moses prescribed tithing in some detail. Leviticus 27:30-32 stated that the tithe of the land would include the seed of the land and the fruit of the tree. In addition the Hebrew people were required to set apart every tenth animal of their herds and flocks to the Lord…. Nowhere does the New Covenant expressly command Christians to tithe…”

 

The New Catholic Encyclopedia: “In the Deuteronomic Code the tithe is limited to grain, wine, and oil (Deut. 12:6, 11, 17; 14:22). These texts more or less equate the tithe with other ritual offerings and sacrifices.”[8]

 

The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary: “The tenth of all produce, flocks, and cattle was declared to be sacred to Jehovah by way, so to speak, of rent to Him who was, strictly speaking, the Owner of the land, and in return for the produce of the ground…. Although the law did not specify the various fruits of the field and of the trees that were to be tithed, the Mishnah (Maaseroth 1.1) includes ‘everything eatable, everything that was stored up or that grew out of the earth…

petra1:


Tithes and offerings are principles in the kingdom of God. From days of Abraham who's our father of faith and who's fait we follow. Abraham didn't give 10% as war booty to a king . He gave tithe to Gods high priest because it's a spiritual principle .

Is that what you tell yourself

The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that early church leaders did not even attempt to introduce tithing for at least 200 years after Calvary.

During this period early church leaders preferred to be extremely poor and predominantly ascetic rather than be sustained by any elaborate system of tithes and offerings. It will be clearly seen that, not only did the inspired writers of the New Testament not teach tithing for the church, neither did those who immediately followed them as leaders of the churches.

 
The “church” was very far from being a united system for many ­ centuries. Competing centers of Christianity arose in Rome, Ephesus, Antioch of Syria, Jerusalem, Caesarea, and North Africa. After the barbarian invasions of the 4th century began, the Roman Empire moved its ­ capital city to Constantinople, where Constantine protected and assisted the church in Constantinople as the most wealthy and influential church for many years to come.
 
While most church historians will laugh at the thought, not only was tithing NOT a doctrine, it was very far from being discussed by the early church.

The locations of the earliest church councils show that Rome was not dominant. The first council at Nicea in A.D. 326 was necessary to ­ discuss the deity of Christ; the second at Constantinople in A.D. 381 was necessary to discuss the deity and person of the Holy Spirit. This was ­ followed by Chalcedon (451); 2nd Constantinople (553); 3rd Constantinople (681); 2nd Nicea (787); 4th Constantinople (869) and, finally, the 1st Lateran Council in Rome in A.D. 1123.

Beginning around the middle of the third century, the tithe only had the authority of a “suggestion” in Cyprian’s small area of influence in North Africa. And Cyprian had no authority over other zones of the divided church.

Tithing would not even become a local church law for over five hundred years after Calvary. The introduction of tithing emerged in direct proportion to the disintegration of the doctrine of the priesthood of believers and the emergence of the power of the bishop-priests.
 
New Testament doctrines concerning the church and giving experienced a drastic change from the end of the first apostolic century to the middle of the third century.

The first stage of decline was the removal of spiritual gifts from the laity

.

The second stage was the distinction of the bishop as a level higher than the other (formerly equal) elders in the church.

The third stage of decline occurred when the bishop was given a high priestly status with spiritual power over the laity

.

In the fourth stage, the bishops, elders, and (sometimes) the deacons were encouraged to stop performing secular work and devote themselves full-time to the church.

Tithing became the fifth stage of this doctrinal decline.

 
Instead of the priesthood of every believer replacing the Old Testament priesthood, the church had gradually reorganized itself to resemble the Old Testament hierarchy. The bishop had become the equivalent to the Old Testament high priest, the presbyters to the Old Testament priests, and the deacons to Old Testament Levites. Full sustenance followed by using the Old Testament pattern of priesthood, sacrifices, and forgiveness controlled by priests. Thus some types of tithing was introduced into the church only after a long period of at least 200-300 years of steady doctrinal decline and only to follow the pattern of Old Testament worship. Even then, tithing was not mandatory or compulsory for many more centuries.


Non-Christian Jews

A noted authority on Judaism, Alfred Edersheim, gives several important points which prove that tithing did not exist in the early centuries of the church. He reminds us of the Jewish customs which were surely followed by at least the Jewish-Christian apostles and disciples.

First, tithing was not universal, even in Israel, because it did not apply to crafts and trades, “And it is remarkable, that the law seems to regard Israel as intended to be only an agricultural people—no contribution being provided for from trade or merchandise.”[1]

.

Second, proper tithes could only come from the holy lands of Israel (p. 15-17).

Third, most Jews considered it a sin to make a profit from teaching the law, “Then, as for the ­ occupation of ordinary life, it was indeed quite true that every Jew was bound to learn some trade or business. But this was not to divert him from study; quite the contrary. It was regarded as a profanation—or at least declared such—to make use of one’s learning for secular purposes, whether of gain or of honor.

The great Hillel had it (Ab. I. 13); ‘He who serves himself by the crown [the Torah] shall fade away’” .

Fourth, rabbis, such as Paul, were not expected to earn a living from teaching the law, “For, in point of fact, with few exceptions, all the leading Rabbinical authorities were working at some trade, till at last it became quite an affectation to engage in hard bodily labor...”

.

And, fifth, honest labor was considered a cherished virtue, “And this same love of honest labor, the same spirit of manly independence, the same horror of trafficking with the law, and using it either as a ‘crown or as a spade,’ was certainly characteristic of the best Rabbis.”

.

Edersheim leaves no room in his conclusions for any idea that rabbis might have taught God’s Law to provide for their own financial sustenance. This very strong tradition among Jews certainly would have been extended into the Jewish Christian church by former Jewish rabbis such as Paul.
 
Later, after the Jews had been banished from the land of Israel, Jewish law was modified concerning tithing. To the question, “How much must a man contribute to charity?”, the answer given in the Code of Jewish Law involved “tithes,” which had become little more than alms. The first year required a tithe of his capital; afterwards he was to tithe net profits. He could chose, instead, to give a fifth of his capital each year, but never more than a fifth. “The tithe money (set aside for charity) must not be used for the purpose of any other religious act, like buying candles for the synagogue; but it must be given to the poor.” However, there were exceptions to this rule. Tithes could be used to pay for circumcision, dowry for poor couples wishing to get married, and setting those couples up in a secure trade.The Jewish sage was expected to either know a craft or learn a craft in order to avoid idleness. In the event that worker did not know or have a craft, the community was to provide a craft or training and help that person as much as possible to earn a living through a trade.Also, the poorest were still not required to tithe, or give to charity, “But he who has barely sufficient for his own needs, is not obligated to give charity, for his own sustenance takes precedence over another’s”


Jewish Christians (Especially Around Jerusalem)

Almost every denomination’s historians of early church history agree that, until A.D. 70 the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem faithfully attended the temple in obedience to Jewish law and, as faithful Jews, supported the Jewish temple with tithes and offerings in addition to their church support. Acts 21:21-24 can hardly lead to any other conclusion!
 
The Jewish Christians had merely added their unique brand of Judaism into the already diverse Judaism of their day. Although the Sadducees did not accept them, the Pharisees did not oppose them and applauded their high moral conduct within Judaism. Jewish Christians narrowly escaped when the temple was destroyed in A.D. 70 by fleeing to Pella. The final banishment of Jews under Emperor Hadrian in A.D. 132-135 ended all hope of Jewish Christian leadership from Jerusalem. (However, the Gentile Christians had an influential church there in the new Roman city.)
 
From the destruction of Jerusalem until the end of the fourth century the “Nazarenes” were identified with a small group of Jewish Christians who held themselves bound by the Law of Moses, but did not refuse fellowship with Gentile Christians. While later splitting into Pharisaic Ebionites, Essenic Ebionites, and Elkaisites, they also considered Paul a false teacher and eventually found themselves outside of the recognized church. These Jewish Christians never ceased teaching that strict obedience to the Mosaic Law was necessary for salvation. Thus, for many Jewish Christians, tithing never left the spiritual environment of the Mosaic Law.[4][5]


The Second and Third Century Apostolic Age Universal Church

It is very easy to demonstrate from Scripture that none of the first century post-Calvary Apostolic fathers like Paul, Peter, John, James, Jude and Luke, taught tithing. Several writings in this post demonstrate that no teaching of tithing exists in Scripture after Calvary.
 
The second and third generation church leaders (c. A.D. 100-200) were almost totally devoted to living an ascetic (self-denying), or semi-ascetic, lifestyle, preaching the gospel, defending the gospel, and helping the poor and needy. Research this for yourself! They abstained from worldly pleasures and took great pride in doing so. Constructing fine houses of worship and accumulating financial independence were completely foreign to their lifestyle.

They took literally Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:21, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell that which you have, and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me,” and Paul’s words to elders in Acts 20:35, “I have shown you all things, how that so laboring you ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”

 
The first generation church fathers wrote very often about the Lord’s Supper being the occasion for offerings for the needy. Almsgiving was considered better than both fasting and prayer. Tithing, however, was not included!
The verifiable presence of freewill-giving in their writings, along with the verifiable absence of tithing in their writings presents a real dilemma for those who support tithing and insist that it was a valid doctrine of the church from the very beginning. Obtain a copy of the ten-volume Ante-Nicean Fathers and settle this issue! Tithe-teachers do not quote the very earliest church leaders in order to validate their doctrinal position.(neither do they quote Jesus nor the Apostles)
 

Robert Baker (Southern Baptist) wrote “The leaders [before A.D. 100] usually worked with their hands for their material needs. There was no ­ artificial distinction between clergy and laity.” He later added, “The ­ earliest bishops or presbyters engaged in secular labor to make their living and performed the duties of their church office when not at work”.

 

Alfred Edersheim (Anglican), in his book, Sketches of Jewish Social Life, devoted an entire chapter to the Jewish work ethic. “Thus…to come to the subject of this chapter…we now understand how so many of the ­ disciples and followers of the Lord gained their living by some craft; how in the same spirit the Master Himself condescended to the trade of his adoptive father; and how the greatest of his apostles throughout earned his bread through the labor of his hands, probably following, like the Lord Jesus, the trade of his father. For it was a principle, frequently expressed, if possible ‘not to forsake the trade of the father.’”

 

Lars P. Qualben (Lutheran) explains this in detail in, A History of the Christian Church. “The local church had elders and deacons who supervised and directed the work of the congregation, administered its charity, took care of the sick, and saw to it that services were regularly held. But the early church organization was not centered in office and in law, but in the special gifts of the Spirit. The teaching, the preaching, and the administration of the sacraments were conducted by the ‘gifted men’ in the congregation. An elder might also teach, preach, and administer the sacraments, but he did not do so because he was an elder, but because he was known to have the ‘gift.’ None of these ‘gifted men’ held church office in a legal or judicial sense. The preaching, the teaching, and the administration of the sacraments were not legally confined to any specific office. The gospel could be preached and the sacraments could be administered in the presence of any assembly of believers, gathered in the name of the Lord.”

 
“Toward the end of the first century a change took place. A general lack of confidence in the special gifts of the Spirit, a desire for more specific order, and a pressing demand for proper safeguard against heresy resulted in a gradual transfer of the preaching, the teaching, and the administration of the sacraments from the ‘gifted men’ to the local elders….”
 
“During the second and third centuries another important change took place. Instead of government by a group of elders, the local churches were headed by single officials for whom the name ‘bishop’ was exclusively reserved…. The election of the bishop became a legal ordinance and the bishop alone had a right to preach, to teach, and to administer the sacraments…”.
 
Philip Schaff comments on church growth before the great persecutions which followed, “Until about the close of the second century the Christians held their worship mostly in private homes, or in desert places, at the graves of martyrs, and in the crypts of the catacombs. This arose from their poverty, their oppressed and outlawed condition, their love of silence and solitude, and their aversion to all heathen art (p. 198).”

“The first traces of special houses of worship occur in Tertullian, who speaks of going to church, and in his contemporary, Clement of Alexandria, who mentions the double meaning of the word ekkleesia.

About the year 230, Alexander Severus granted the Christians the right to a place in Rome…. After the middle of the third century the building of churches began in great earnest….” (pp. 199-200).

 
“Thus we find, so early as the third century, the foundations of a complete hierarchy; though a hierarchy of only moral power, and holding no sort of outward control over the conscience…. With the exaltation of the clergy [in the third century] appeared the tendency to separate them from secular business, and even from social relations…. They drew their support from the church treasury, which was supplied by voluntary contributions and weekly collections on the Lord’s Day. After the third century they were forbidden to engage in any secular business, or even to accept any trusteeship” [as per Cyprian in North Africa only] (p. 128).[9]
 
While there were many pre-Nicean (pre A.D. 325) early church fathers whose writings still exist, until Cyprian, they did not write about any form of suggested enforced tithing at all. These include Clement of Rome, Mathetes, Polycarp, Ignatius, Barnabas, Papias, Justin, the Pastor of Hermas, Tatian, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Commodianus, Origen, Hippolytus, Caius, and Novatium.
 

In an effort to support early tithing, the McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature ­ actually verifies my claims. Under tithes it says, “The obligation from ecclesiastical literature has been put forward from the earliest period. The Apostolic Canons [c. 300], the Apostolic Constitutions [c. 300], St. Cyprian (d. 258], and the works of Ambrose [d. 397], Chrysostom [d. 407], Augustine [d. 430] and the other fathers of both divisions of the Church [East and West, but not Greek] abound with illusions to it.” For this resource, although “abound” is an exaggeration, “the earliest period” skipped the first 200 years after Calvary. (See Cyprian following.)

 
Clement of Rome(c. 95) began writing about the same time the Apostle John died. His writings do not use the word, “tithe.”

He is not specific when he wrote, “He [God] has enjoined offerings [to be presented] and service to be performed [to Him], and that not thoughtlessly or irregularly, but at the appointed times and hours” (First Letter to the Corinthians, chapter 40). Most likely, at this time, Jewish Christians in the Roman church would have objected to any hint that tithes be taken away from Levitical priests.

 
Justin Martyr (c. 150) (from the area of old Samaria) wrote,

“And the wealthy among us help the needy…when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgiving, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us”

(First Apology, chap. 67). In accordance with the first century Scripture, “presidents,” or church leaders, are only capable administrators, and not necessarily pastors or teachers of the Word.
 
Justin’s writings only use the word, “tithe,” four times: twice from Matthew 23:23 to point out that the Jews did not like Christ, and twice from Genesis 14:20 while proving that Melchizedek did not require circumcision.

The Didache, or Teaching of the Twelve (150-200?), was discovered in the late 19th century at the Jewish Monastery of the Most Holy Sepulcher at Constantinople. It is not known if it is authentic, represents the norm, or is from an aberrant offshoot. It appears to be a Jewish-Christian document from approximately the middle of the second century, and it gives some interesting ideas about how prophets and church leaders were supported.
 

Paragraph XI:…“Now, as concerning the apostles and prophets according to the teaching of the gospel, so do; and let every apostle that comes to you be received as the Lord; and he shall stay but one day, and, if need be, the next day also; but if he stays three days he is a false prophet. When the apostle goes forth, let him take nothing but bread, until he reaches his lodging: if he asks for money, he is a false prophet…. But whosoever shall say in spirit, ‘Give me money, or other things,’ you shall not listen to him; but it he bids you to give for others that are in need, let no man judge him.”
 
[quote]Paragraph XII may (or may not) only refer to ordinary travelers. Its location between paragraphs 11 and 13 should be considered. “Let every one that ‘comes in the name of the Lord’ be received” and proven…. “If he wishes to abide with you, being a craftsman, let him work and eat. If he has no craft, use your common sense to provide that he lives with you as a Christian, without idleness. If he is unwilling to do so, he is a ‘Christ monger.’ Beware of such.”

 

Paragraph XIII: “But every true prophet that desires to abide with you is ‘worthy of his food,’ In like manner a true teacher is also, like the laborer, ‘worthy of his food.’ Therefore you shall take and give to the prophets every firstfruits of the produce of the wine-press and the threshing floor, of oxen and sheep. For the prophets are your high priests. If you have no prophet, give them to the poor….”

 

Paragraph XV: “Elect therefore of yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men that are gentle but not covetous, true men and approved; for they also minister to you the ministry of the prophets and leaders.”[10]

 
Although many tithe-teachers quote paragraphs XIII and XV to prove that the early church taught tithing and conveniently ignore paragraphs XI and XII, they greatly deceive when they do this! Paragraphs XI and XII make it clear that paragraphs XIII and XV cannot possibly be stretched to teach tithing.

The word, tithing, does not even appear.

Also, when the church finally did try to teach tithing, it did not give the whole tithe to the deacons as Paragraph XV would require if they were the Levites. Perhaps this non-authoritative document is placed in the middle of the second century because of some elevation of bishops, but before the authority urged on them by Cyprian. Noticeably, though, the firstfruits match the description of only food items from Numbers 18 and are not the same thing as tithes. Also, it seems that even these would not be totally supported by the church if it were small, but would be required to retain a trade. It is interesting to note that paragraph XIII says, if there is no prophet in the church, then give the firstfruits to the poor.
 
Irenaeus (150-200) (bishop of Lyons in France and teacher of Hippolytus), clearly did not teach tithing.

“And for this reason did the Lord, instead of that [commandment], ‘You shall not commit adultery,’ forbid even concupiscence; and instead of that which runs thus, ‘You shall not kill,’ He prohibited anger; and instead of the law enjoining the giving of tithes, to share all our possessions with the poor; and not to love our neighbors only, but even our enemies; and not merely to be liberal givers and bestowers, but even that we should present a gratuitous gift to those who take away our goods” (Against Heresies, book 4, chap. 13, para. 3). If anything, this teaches extreme asceticism.

 

“For with Him there is nothing purposeless, nor without signification, nor without design. And for this reason they (the Jews) had indeed the tithes of their goods consecrated to Him, but those who have received liberty set aside all their possessions for the Lord’s purposes, bestowing joyfully and freely not the less valuable portions of their property, since they have the hope of better things [hereafter]; as that poor widow acted who cast all her living into the treasury of God”

(Against Heresies, book 4, chap. 18).

Again, poverty and asceticism are indicated. Irenaeus clearly taught that the church was a dispenser of necessities for the poor. His life and writings reveal that he believed that its leaders should live as meagerly as ­ possible.
 
Tertullian (150-220) was a prolific writer from Carthage in northern Africa whose writings do not teach tithing. He was also a Montanist who lived an extremely ascetic lifestyle. For the Montanists, extreme poverty was a virtue which allowed absolutely no room for a doctrine of tithing. Since he taught that all incoming offerings should be given to the poor, Tertullian would not have taught that church leaders should be supported through tithes. His only recorded uses of the word, “tithe,” appear when he quotes Matthew 23:23 to compare Marcion’s hypocrisy with that of the Pharisees (Marcion, book 4, chap. 27) and Genesis 14:20 when he argued, like Justin Martyr, that Melchizedek was not circumcised (book 5, chap. 9).
 

Tertullian also wrote, “Our presidents are elders of proved worth, men who have attained this honor not for a price, but by character. Every man brings some modest coin once a month or whenever he wishes, and only if he is willing and able; it is a freewill offering. You might call them the trust-funds of piety; they are spent…on the support and burial of the poor…”

(Apology, xxxix, 1-18). From these it is clear that, at least near the end of the second century, no tithing existed solely to support full-time clergy.
 
Cyprian (200-258) followed Tertullian in Carthage (North Africa only) and was probably the first influential leader to suggest (unsuccessfully) that tithes should support a full-time clergy. It must be remembered that, by Cyprian’s time at least the first departures from the apostolic age ­ doctrine had occurred. Spiritual gifts had mostly been taken from the laity and placed within various levels of the clergy. The office of bishop had been distinguished above that of elder and presbyter, and each bishop had spiritual power over the laity through the crude sacramental system. Also his church now erroneously compared the bishop to the Old Testament high priest, the presbyters to the Old Testament priests, and the deacons to Old Testament Levites. Cyprian merely took what he thought was the next logical step (in this scenario of the role of bishops) and insisted that the clergy should cease all secular work and depend on tithes for full-time ­ support.

At least in the Western church, the Old Testament pattern of priesthood, sacrifices, and forgiveness was now controlled by so-called Christian high priests, Christian priests, and Christian Levites. Such is the context of Cyprian’s tithing appeals! Yet all of the pro-tithing apologists I have read point to Cyprian as their prime evidence of early tithing. While only a bishop in Africa, Cyprian did not have authority beyond his own sphere of influence. Those who quote Cyprian to support early church tithing should place their quotation in this limited historical context!
 
However, Cyprian’s tithing still does not qualify as “proof” that the early church taught tithing

Although not as ascetic as the Montanists and his favorite teacher, Tertullian, Cyprian was, nevertheless, an ascetic who gave up his considerable fortune at his baptism. While he strongly advocated that bishops, presbyters, and deacons should receive tithes and devote full-time service to the church, he did not suggest that they should live above the poverty level (Letter 65, para. 1). At one occasion, in his Letter 4, he said that the “whole of the small sum which was collected” was given to the clergy and they distributed it to those in need. Any person who has read Cyprian knows of his generation’s many uses of Christ’s injunction, “If you want to be perfect, go and sell that you have, and give to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven, and come and follow me.” Cyprian’s understanding of tithing was that church leaders should only take the bare minimum and distribute the remainder to the poor. Read Cyprian yourself!
 
The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles (book 2, section 4), is a fictional account probably dating from the third or fourth century. It was not accepted by the Church until many centuries later. Its use of tithing reflects an evolution of the doctrine to about the same level as that of Cyprian.
 
“On the Management of the Resources Collected for the Support of the Clergy and the Relief of the Poor:”
 

“Let the bishop esteem such food and raiment sufficient as suits necessity and decency. Let him not make use of the Lord’s goods as another’s, but moderately; ‘for the laborer is worthy of his reward.’ Let him not be luxurious in diet, or fond of idle furniture, but contented with so much alone as is necessary for his sustenance.”

 

“On Firstfruits and Tithes, and After What Manner the Bishop is Himself to Partake of Them, or Distribute Them to Others”
 
XXV. Let him use those tenths and first-fruits, which are given according to the command of God, as a man of God; as also let him dispense in a right manner the free-will offerings which are brought in on account of the poor, to the orphans, the widows, the afflicted, and strangers in distress, as having that God for the examiner of his accounts who has committed the disposition to him. Distribute to all those in want with righteousness, and yourselves use the things which belong to the Lord, but do not abuse them, eating of them, but not eating them all up by yourselves: communicate with those who are in want, and thereby show yourselves unblameable before God. For if you shall consume them by yourselves, you will be reproached by God….”
 
“For those who attend upon the Church ought to be maintained by the Church, as being priests, Levites, presidents, and ministers of God; as it is written in the book of Numbers concerning the priests….”
 
“Those which were then first-fruits, and tithes, and offerings, and gifts, now are oblations, which are presented by holy bishops to the Lord God, through Jesus Christ, who has died for them. For these are your high priests, as the presbyters are your priests, and your present deacons instead of your Levites; as are also your readers, your singers, your porters, your deaconesses, your widows, your virgins, and your orphans: but He who is above all these is the High Priest.”

 

XXVI. “The bishop, he is the minister of the word, the keeper of knowledge, the mediator between God and you in the several parts of your divine worship. He is the teacher of piety; and, next after God, he is your father, who has begotten you again to the adoption of sons by water and the Spirit. He is your ruler and governor; he is your king and potentate; he is, next after God, your earthly God, who has a right to be honored by you.”
 
XXVII. “You ought therefore, brothers, to bring your sacrifices and your oblations to the bishop, as to your high priest, either by yourselves or by the deacons; and do you bring not those only, but also your first-fruits, and your tithes, and your free-will offerings to him. For he knows who they are that are in affliction, and gives to every one as is convenient, that so one may not receive alms twice or more often the same day, or the same week, while another has nothing at all”.

 
[My comments on the Constitutions of the Apostles. While attempting to use the language of the Old Testament Law, several differences are apparent. First, now the high priest, not the Levites, receives the tithes directly.
Second, the bishop is to maintain a bare sustenance level from what he takes from the tithes and offerings.
Third, the bishop is directly responsible for re-distributing both tithes and offerings back to the needy.
Fourth, the new priestly caste system does not refer to Abraham’s tithe to Melchizedek in Genesis 14 for pre-Law justification, nor to “It is holy to the Lord” in Leviticus 27:30 for an eternal principle.

Clearly, the justification for re-introducing tithing into this particular early church, even if only a voluntary offering, was the result of the abandonment of the doctrine of the priesthood of the believer and the elevation of the position of priest and high priest.

Therefore, it is easy to understand why modern Protestant tithe-teachers do not appeal to this document for validation of tithing as a legitimate doctrine. Finally, even this document was rejected by the Roman Catholic Church because tithing did not become church Law until the end of the sixth century.]


A Summary of Historical Reasons to Reject Tithing

For the following reasons which have been supported by many ­ reputable authorities in this chapter and elsewhere in this book, tithing cannot be supported as a valid doctrine found in early post-biblical ­ history.

One: It is certain that Jewish-Christians in Palestine continued to send tithes to the temple as part of their obedience to the law (Acts 15 and 21) at least until A.D. 70. Post-biblical history proves that most of these never abandoned the Mosaic Law, refused full fellowship with Gentile Christians, rejected Paul, later split into factions, and disappeared around the end of the fourth century.

Two: Jewish Christians, like Paul, who had been trained in the strict traditions of the Mosaic Law would have never accepted full-time support for teaching the Old Testament Sacred Writings concerning Christ.

Three: Jewish Christians viewed tithing as purely law, which they specifically ordered Gentile Christians not to obey (Acts 15 and 21).

Four: Jewish Christians were taught to earn their living through a trade and not depend on charity. Both Jewish and Christian sages were ­ supported by the communities through support of their trade.

Five: The secular crafts and trades of many rabbis and later church leaders are recorded in history. Many church historians comment on the fact that the early church leaders sustained themselves by a trade (rather than by tithing). This is documented by numerous footnotes in this writing, especially the chapter on First Corinthians 9, Acts 20, and this section.

Six: The church was early considered “un-licensed (or illegal?)” and it was considered an “outlaw” since approximately A.D. 80. The Romans required all citizens to register their livelihood and proof of sustenance. For at least the first two hundred plus years after Calvary, anybody claiming to be a full-time gospel worker would have been arrested as an insurrectionist who had no evident means of support such as a trade.

Seven: Since Christians were sporadically killed by mobs and the government for much of the first three centuries, it seems improbable that the earliest leaders would openly reveal themselves (by not having an obvious trade) that they were full-time church leaders.

Eight: When the New Testament was written, very few, if any, of the churches were organized into a ruling-bishop system which would require or sustain a full-time minister. The churches were too primitive, too small, too poor, and often had to hide from the authorities to meet. Church buildings did not exist because they would not have been tolerated until about A.D. 200 and did not flourish until after A.D. 260 before being destroyed again in 303.[11] Persecution varied widely around the Roman Empire.

Nine: The earliest churches did not distinguish between “clergy” and “laity” for several centuries. Gifted lay members preached and carried out other functions which were later restricted to full-time ordained clergy. For example, a gifted “administrator” may have been in charge while another gifted person “preached” and another gifted person “taught” the Word. This fact would preclude giving tithes when numerous laity exercised their spiritual gifts.

Ten: It is very likely that even slaves held leadership roles as elders and bishops in the early church. The noted scholar, F. F. Bruce, says that “Pius, bishop of the Roman church towards the middle of the second century, if not a slave himself, was at any rate the brother of a slave; and Callistus, bishop of the same church in the early part of the third century, was an ex-slave”.[12] Slaves would certainly not accept tithes for their sustenance!

Eleven: Perhaps the best post-biblical argument against tithing in the Ante-Nicean church is the church’s overall attitude towards Christian virtues, ethics, poverty, and asceticism. To state it plainly, “Poverty was ­ considered a virtue, especially among the clergy!” While still retaining fresh memories of the first apostles and disciples, the miracles of the first ­ century, and, while still expecting a soon return of Jesus Christ, the pre-Constantine (pre-A.D. 325) church, was a charity organization which received offerings only to serve the poor, widows, and orphans of society.

The Church from the Fourth Century until the Eighth Century

The church in the first centuries had a very different use for money than the typical church today. Williston Walker reports that, in the year A.D. 251, the church of Rome under Bishop Grainelius had a membership of approximately 30,000 members and supported over 1,500 dependents. This amounts to one dependent per 20 members!
 
Although Cyprian tried to enforce his idea that church workers should not pursue secular trades, Walker comments, “By the middle of the third century the higher clergy were expected to give their whole time to the work of the ministry, yet even bishops sometimes shared in secular business, not always of a commendable character. The lower clergy could still engage in trade”.[14]
It may, or may not, be noteworthy that Schaff does not mention church “buildings” until the lapse of persecution between 260-303. It is unclear to what extent church edifices existed prior to this time. As long as Christians were blamed for almost every disaster such as famines, earthquakes, floods, battle losses, and barbarian invasions, the pagan population very often punished the church as its scapegoat and would have quickly destroyed highly visible and accessible structures associated with the church.
 
The Encyclopedia Americana says, “It [tithing] was not practiced in the early Christian church, but gradually became common by the 6th ­ century.”[15] The statement assumes Cyprian’s failure in North Africa and probably means that tithing was not practiced “by enforcement of Church or secular law” until the 6th century.
 
The Catholic Encyclopedia (1912 edition only) says, “In the beginning ­ [provision] was supplied by the spontaneous support of the faithful. In the course of time, however, 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, and early writers speak of it as a divine ordinance and an obligation of the conscience. 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.”[16]
 
While it may appear that both the Encyclopedia Americana and the Catholic Encyclopedia ignore all of the tithing references made by Cyprian and the Constitutions of the Apostles as invalid, actually, they must be agreeing with the premise of this article that the early church did not teach tithing! When tithing was first re-introduced into the church, it was voluntary and was built on an erroneous comparison of the New Covenant bishop as a high priest to the Old Testament priesthood.
 
Centuries later, the church acquired wealth in the form of land. At first wealthy landowners donated land to the church for parishes, but retained the privileges of nominating the bishops and keeping the profits and tithes from the land in their own secular hands. Therefore, tithing soon became a source of abuse. Eventually, however, the church gained enough secular authority to regain appointment of its own priests and bishops again, along with keeping the tithes in the church. The church soon owned from one half to one fourth of the land in many European countries and enacted tithes from those who rented its lands.

Historians usually agree that, not until A.D. 567, five hundred and thirty seven (537) years after Calvary, did the Church’s first substantial attempt to enforce tithing under its own authority appear in history! The Council of Tours in 567 and the Council of Macon in 585 enacted regional church decrees for tithing and excommunication of non-tithers, but did not receive authority from the king to enforce collection through civil decrees.

It is significant that tithing did not emerge historically until the church became powerful in the secular realm. Even at this late date tithes were still only food. Eventually the Roman Church even refused to administer last rites if it was not given wealth or land in wills.
 
Between 774 to 777 the Frankish king, Charlemagne, destroyed the Arian Lombard kingdom which separated his empire from northern Italy. After his defeat of the Lombards, Charlemagne’s unopposed rule included northern Italy and Rome. By quoting the Mosaic Law as its authority at a Church synod, the pope finally convinced Charlemagne to allow enforced agricultural tithing in support of the fast-growing parish system of churches. In 785 Pope Hadrian attempted to impose tithing on the Anglo-Saxons. In appreciation of his church support, on Christmas Day, A.D. 800, the pope crowned Charlemagne as Holy Roman Emperor, thus making official the renewed “Holy” Roman Empire.
 
In 906 King Edgar legally enforced food tithing in England. In 1067 and 1078, at the Church Councils of Gerona, and in 1215 at the Fourth Lateran Council, tithing was increasingly applied to all lands under Christian rule.

All citizens, including Jews, were required to tithe to the Roman Catholic Church. A typical peasant was giving the first tithe of his land to his secular ruler or landlord (which was often the church) and a second tenth to the church outright.

In 1179 the Third Lateran Council decreed that only the pope could release persons from the obligation to tithe, and he exempted the Crusaders.
 
For several centuries the right to collect agricultural tithes shifted back and forth between the Church and the secular authority –depending on which was the strongest power.

Pope Innocent III (1198-1216), in order to strengthen and purify the church, ordered that tithes for the support of the church be given precedence over all other taxes, excluded all lay interference in church affairs, and prohibited any one man from drawing the income from more than one church office.

Theologian Thomas Aquinas defended tithing by stating, “During the time of the New Law the authority of the Church has established the payment of tithes” (Summa Theologica, Vol. 3, The Second Part of the Second Part). He did use Genesis 14 and Melchizedek to substantiate his argument.

 
Exacting agricultural tithes from Jews became especially severe in England and Germanic countries. Beginning around the 14th century, Jews were not even allowed to own land in many nations. This forced the Jews off the land and many went into banking and commerce because those occupations and money were not included in tithing. In 1372 even the clergy in Germany revolted at having to pay tithes to the pope.
 
Not long after the Bible had been translated into the language of the common man, Otto Brumfels in 1524 proclaimed that the New Testament does not teach tithing.

Later that century, Pope Gregory VII, in an effort to control secular ownership of tithes, once again outlawed lay ownership of tithes.
 
In 1714 the English Anglican exacted agricultural tithes from Roman Catholics and Presbyterians for the support of the Church of Ireland. Soon revolt became ripe in France. Some of the earliest stages of the French Revolution were actions which struck at the privileges and status of the Roman Catholic Church.

In 1789, tithes were abolished in France by the secular authority.
 
Other revolts against tithing followed.

Between 1836 and 1850 tithing was mostly abolished in England.

It was later commuted to a rental to be paid in cash.

In 1868, as a result of agitation which began at least as far back as the 1830’s and which was pushed by Dissenters, the compulsory payment of local parish tithes for the maintenance of the church was abolished and was made purely voluntary. However, the final tithe rent charges were not abolished until 1936 in England.
 
In Canada, as late as 1868, the Fourth Council of Quebec declared that tithing was mandatory. For a while tithes were even made mandatory in the French lands of the New World until the territory was sold in the Louisiana Purchase.

In 1871 tithes were abolished in Ireland.

In 1887 they ended in Italy.

In West Germany residents must formally renounce church membership in order to avoid mandatory church taxation.

Elsewhere, the Eastern Orthodox Church has never accepted tithing and its members have never practiced it.

The Roman Catholic Church still prescribes tithes in countries where they are sanctioned by law, and some Protestant bodies still consider tithes obligatory.
 
Today most religious bodies have abandoned the practice of compulsory tithing, particularly in the United States, where no system of tithing was ever generally employed after the American Revolution. Tithing was never a legal requirement in the United States.

Nevertheless, members of certain churches, including the Latter Day Saints and Seventh-Day Adventists are required to tithe and some Christians in other churches do so voluntarily.

Southern Baptists define tithing as an “expectation” and some of its churches are pushing to make tithing a requirement for membership (in addition to holding church offices). For further study, most books on church history briefly discuss the history of tithing since Bible times. As Europe slowly rejected church-state taxation and the divine right of kings, it also rejected enforced tithing to state-supported churches.


The biblical model of tithing best fits a church-state economy similar to Israel’s theocracy. History reveals that tithing became a “Christian” doctrine only after the Roman Catholic Church joined hands with secular and political forces.

However, just as tithing was an unprofitable ordinance which never produced spiritual growth in national Israel under the Old Covenant, even so tithing never led to spiritual growth when used by Christians and was eventually forced into retirement a second time by state churches.

Both Roman Catholics and Protestants have been guilty of oppression and persecution regarding state mandated tithing laws. And, like Old Covenant tithing in national Israel, nothing good has ever resulted from such attempts to enforce tithing on another.

Also try and READ the Malachi Prophecy

I hope I have clearly stated both biblical and historical facts about tithing.


In THE MALACHI'S PROPHESY WE WILL LEARN

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 SCRIPTURES KNOW NOTHING OF "CHRISTIAN TITHING"

Jesus Christ’s followers did not pay tithe to Him from farm products or herds; neither did His followers pay Him ten percent of their salaries from other sources of income. "Christian tithing" is an oxymoron—it is a contradiction of words. Nay, it is more: it is, in fact, a Christian hoax! "Christian tithing" is about as Scriptural as "Christian burnt offerings," "Christian stonings," or "Christian synagogues." The leaders of Christendom have bamboozled millions (billions) of unsuspecting laity into believing that "Christian tithing" is a Scriptural command from God Himself, and can easily be found and supported in the pages of Divine Scripture. Oh really?

Of the 613 laws contained in the first five books of the Bible written by Moses, why is it that aside from the ten commandments, "tithing" is virtually the only other law that the modern Church tries to retain? They retain it in name only, however, since there is nothing similar between Moses "law of tithing" and "Christian tithing" except the aspect of ten percent. Christian tithing is an extra-biblical concept and doctrine—aside from the ten percent it has nothing in common with the tithing law of Moses, and was never practiced by the New Testament Church.

Not only is Christian tithing taught to be needful, it is taught as if it were a divine, binding LAW. But there is no such thing as a "Christian tithing law" in the New Testament Scriptures. It is a heresy, used by the Church, independent cults, and charlatans of every description, as a club to beat and threaten parishioners into surrendering ten percent of their salaries in obedience to this phantom law. All are forewarned that failure to pay this 10% Church tax will cause them to be "cursed with a CURSE!" There is indeed "a curse," but it is not God Who pronounces it.

NO TITHING IN THE CHURCH OF THE APOSTLES

We have Scriptural proof that no such law or custom as Christian tithing was taught or practiced in the Church by the early apostles. Their epistles are totally devoid of any such tithing custom or law. Gentile converts were never taught to tithe to anyone. Although the temple and priesthood in Jerusalem remained until 70 AD, not even Jewish converts were taught to give their tithes to the Apostles rather than to the temple priests.

In the Acts 15 Jerusalem Conference we find outlined what the apostles all agreed was necessary for the newly converted Gentiles to practice, and by inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God, tithing is conspicuously missing. Some believing Pharisees wanted the apostles to teach the Gentiles to keep the Law of Moses (which certainly contained the law of tithing, Acts 15:5), but the apostles headed by Peter, James, and Paul would not hear of it (Acts 15:28-29)! Yet, what is one of the very first legislated duties taught to Gentile converts by the Church today? It is that they must tithe their annual salaries to the Church. Where did this unscriptural law of Christian tithing come from?

Notice this telling bit of history from the Encyclopedia Britannica, "Tithes in Christendom—The earliest authentic example of anything like a law of the State enforcing payment appears to occur in the capitularies [ecclesiasticals] of Charlemagne at the end of the 8th or beginning of the 9th century. Tithes were by that enactment to be applied to the maintenance of the bishop, clergy, the poor, and the fabric of the church. In the course of time the principle of payment of tithes was extended FAR BEYOND its original intention. Thus they became transferable to laymen and saleable like ordinary property, in spite of the injunctions of the third Lateran Council; and they became payable OUT OF SOURCES OF INCOME [not just farming and herding, but other trades and occupations and salaries paid in the form of money] NOT ORIGINALLY TITHABLE." (1963, volume 22, page 253, ‘TITHES’).

The Catholic Church knows its own history. Here is 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.

They "extended" their base of tithe collecting to eventually include all forms of income. All Christian scholars know that although money was in wide use in ancient Israel, it was never a titheable commodity. But modern Christian pastors of God’s sheep don’t want tithes of goats or oil or corn—they want money—cold hard cash. God has a word to the "shepherds of the sheep," and it is the very same message that He had for the Levites in the book of Malachi. And it is this:

"My people have been lost sheep [Why? How did they get that way?] their SHEPHERDS have caused them to go astray" (Jer. 50:6).

Was Israel consciously aware of the fact that they were being led astray by their spiritual leaders? Not most, and neither is the world of Christendom today aware that they are being lead astray by their spiritual leaders.

I am going to be editing the text to make it more readable.

Prove them wrong, Nigerians do read

With so many lies and churches built on false corrupted foundation and not on God's word and truth but on greed and human motives. Genuine Christians should hunger for the real truth

If the Truth found in God's word isn't sufficient to convince Christians of the error of tithing, maybe History of our true founder fathers of the earliest centuries could still speak to us today and hope we learn the truth

We can help make the church what it should be, a place of spiritual and physical help not a place of trade, you give because your blessed not because you want God to bless you

This is a textbook, great work! Do not forget to give the credits to the researchers. I have gone about 4 posts down from the beginning, will read further as time permits. Till this moment the promulgators of Christian tithe laws or some will call it revelations have not found a Bible verse that will give it the backing. Like a place where Jesus and his disciples paid or received money tithe on God's behalf.
The things I read so far are the things we already know and many Nigerians are beginning to know that Christ didn't require tithe to bless anybody.
There are no such laws for Christians and no complicated attachments, yoke, coercions, bonds, ritualistic covenants and all such nonsense between a Christian and his God.
The new "covenant" spelt liberty and friendship with God devoid of fears.
Therefore,

anybody tricked into rash commitments/oaths of delivering 10% of his income in the name of tithe is set free by this Knowledge. But that and much more can be given as offering which does not have any lacing of legalism.

The knowledge of the new testament will keep as many that will seek it, free from subtle legalism introduced by wolves. Anything about money or almsgiving is completely freewill and as one proposes in his heart, when given to a Church it is rightly an OFFERING.
Moreover, Christ places a premium on the works of charity, care for the widows, the orphans, helpless and the prisoners more than submitting large sums as Offerings to a man of God or to a temple. The absolute needs of a true place of worship is 100% met by Jesus because He provides for his people and lays it in their hearts to give at every turn. There is no complicated matters of tithe and money seed in the Church of Jesus Christ.

its a nice write up. its quite lengthy but would definitely read all of it.

kkins25:
its a nice write up. its quite lengthy but would definitely read all of it.

Ya, that would be nice, share as much as you can so the truth get round

To teach tithing you must teach the law

But to teach love is to teach giving. For so loved that he gave and we in his very nature give

No man teaches tithing teaches it with love, teaching it, commanding it and refusing you question it, so are really free or a slave

I especially like "some of the historical references"... But just to emphasize the Catholic Church doesn't put tithing as a Law anymore.. That injunction at the Council of Trent no longer applies...
People give as they see fit...

easymancfc:
I especially like "some of the historical references"... But just to emphasize the Catholic Church doesn't put tithing as a Law anymore.. That injunction at the Council of Trent no longer applies...
People give as they see fit...

Thanks

That's why the title is it's origin not it's practise

You will see later on that I stated some of its end in some churches

Well done! You've done a good job here.

Because today's Christian no longer THINKS he swallows any thing that is offered to him hook line and sinker.

Many who are quick to preach 'Christian liberty' are the same who put many under the yoke of slavery.

The FACT that no New Testament epistle commands tithing ought ordinarily to speak volume to the Christian. But it would appear that when LEGALISM drives a group of people, reason is thrown to the wind.

I pray that many who read this writeup will do so with an unbiased mind and so profit from it.

plainbibletruth:
Well done! You've done a good job here.

Because today's Christian no longer THINKS he swallows any thing that is offered to him hook line and sinker.

Many who are quick to preach 'Christian liberty' are the same who put many under the yoke of slavery.

The FACT that no New Testament epistle commands tithing ought ordinarily to speak volume to the Christian. But it would appear that when LEGALISM drives a group of people, reason is thrown to the wind.

I pray that many who read this writeup will do so with an unbiased mind and so profit from it.

I pray so to, so pls do share the link or the information you have found useful here.

Thanks

Do read the malachi's prophecy and know what God's message is, not what it has been twisted to mean

https://www.nairaland.com/3992834/malachis-prophecy

.

MISHIGAS!

This post is the biggest pile of excrement I have seen on NAIRALAND- and I've read SCIENCEWATCH'S Posts!

The entire point here is that CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT PAY TITHES.

WHY did the author write this?

Answer: TO CUT REVENUES TO PROTESTANT CHURCHES.

Nothing more.

The author HATES the Lord Yahshua and his Followers, and wants them impoverished.

There is no iota of FAITH in any of this crap the author spews out, as from an anus; it is dead as Dangote Cement compared with Golden Penny Flour.

Where does it come from?

The Original Poster, "BLUEANGEL444," has no qualms about letting people think that HE is the author.

The whole write-up is plagiarized verbatim from a website called:

NEW TESTAMENT GIVING: MONEY AND FINANCE TEACHING ACCORDING TO THE BIBLE COMUNICATING BIBLICAL TRUTH AND VISION. 1st TIMOTHY 6:10: "FOR THE LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL."

The banner ends with the subtitle:

"BIBLICAL TITHING REVEALED THROUGH THE EYES OF AN ACCOUNTANT."

My Rule of Thumb is that ANY CHRISTIAN TEACHER who does not PROPERLY INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, and STATE what their CHRISTIAN AFFILIATION is, before telling people how to live their lives, IS A DECEIVER!

During the time when people were POOR, (I.e. THE DEPRESSION,) there were preachers who were so desperate for money, they resorted to DECEPTION. Roman Catholic Christians asked them, anxiously:

"Are you CATHOLIC?"

They (there is one example I recall- but cannot vouch for his name,) replied: "Yes, we're CATHOLIC."

The argument being, that "CATHOLIC" means "UNIVERSAL," and they regarded themselves as "universal."

Later on in his ministry, the former Pastor (who had graduated to Apostle, or something,) was addressed by the title "DAD."

So they could say they were not breaking Yahshua's Commandment: "Call no man your Father upon the Earth."

"DAD" is a SYNONYM of "FATHER."

Just as "PASTOR," "OVERSEER,""STEWARD"or whatever, are SYNONYMOUS with "RABBI," "TEACHER," and "MASTER."

That is to say: IT DOESN'T FOOL GOD!

So we have this UNDERCOVER SCUMBAG out to undermine FAITH in TITHING- all without telling us WHO HE IS, and WHAT CHURCH he represents!

I believe these people are even happiest when they can say: "I didn't SAY I was a CHRISTIAN! I never LIED about leading them to JESUS!"

Then we have to look at who this BLUEANGEL444 is.

What does HE represent?

BlueAngel444:
People have a false belief that the devil is completely evil but that's a lie.
For something to be complete it has to be whole, be perfect, be holy and evil can't be complete or whole.
Evil is corruption, meaning it's corrupting something.

A times people think of God has positive and devil has negative, or two sides fighting of equal grounds but that's a lie.

The devil or Satan is not completely evil, he has good and evil in him

. JOHN 8:44.


44. "Ye are of your Father The Devil,
and the lusts of your Father ye will do.
He was a Murderer
From The Beginning,
and abode not in The Truth,
because there is no Truth in him.
When he speaketh a lie,
he speaketh of his own:
for he is a liar,
and the Father of It."

I know all about saying something that sounds 180° opposite from The Word of God- but really isn't- but only those who LOVE GOD, and DO THEIR HOMEWORK, would know the difference.

But what this guy days here is a LIE.

THERE IS NO GOOD IN THE DEVIL: PERIOD!

oaroloye:


. MARK 10:17-18.

17. And when he was gone forth into the way,
there came one running,
and kneeled to him, and asked him,
"Good Master, what shall I do
that I may inherit Eternal Life?

18. And Jesus said unto him,

"Why callest thou me good?
there is none good but One,
that is, God.

BLUEANGEL444 is therefore a BAD GUY, merely casting STUMBLINGBLOCKS before the BLIND.

jiggaz:
“Don’t stray too far from the red letters,” is a piece of advice often given to new preachers. It means, stay close to the teachings of Jesus and you can’t go wrong. It sounds good, but it’s actually bad advice. Everything Jesus said was good and wonderful, but not everything He said was meant for you.

You need to know THREE THINGS about OYINBO CHRISTIANS:

1. THEY ARE BLOODY LIARS.

2. THEY ARE BLOODY LIARS.

3. THEY ARE BLOODY LIARS.

(There MAY be a FOURTH thing... but it doesn't come to mind, right now...)

I think you get my general drift, here?

. LEVITICUS 19:14.

14. "Thou shalt not curse the deaf,
nor put a stumblingblock
before the blind,
but shalt fear thy God:
I (am) The LORD."

Such topic hardly receive attention. I'm not just talking about the veracity of its claims (everyone ought to reach his/her conclusion). But it has presented a viewpoint which should be debated. But don't expect our people to actually have time for this sort of thing.

We have millions of "graduates" who can't endure the torture of reading 3,000 written words. e too long. Really? They want everything in "tweet" size. Give me the headline and forget the rest.

This is very troubling


preccy69 over to you. Land here after church.

Not in a hurry to reply the post by oaroloye, don't want to but for the sake of Truth & God's love for people let me reply THE POST

Lots of assumptions and attack from it, is it to divert people's attention from the post.

First off reading through the post, plagiarism is just a false accusation like pharisees did to divert people's attention from the Truth by seeking my personality and neglecting the Truth
why should my name be added, is it for an award, for review or recognition, how can the ideas be stolen if they are shared and my inputs are in it. The various articles and websites (just one like was erroneously stated) don't restrict the information neither do I. I did quote the Historians and major sources for reference. If you won't read this, is it the volumes of sources you would read

So if 1 said, Jesus wept, without saying John wrote Jesus wept does that make one guilty of plagiarism .
Am not after popularity like people who post links to their websites

The focus should be on the articles shared with you all

now because you call someone a bad guy doesn't make you good, even the self righteous sadducees did that

I am not going to defend myself, but here's a link to thread where the quote was lifted from

https://www-nairaland-com/3989424/exposing-truth1-devil-completely-evil

Though that post is geared more to my personality than the true purpose of the article, which is information and not just personal opinion let me stat somethings
That above post is a classic example of quoting out of context to prove a point, not necessarily stating the truth to eradicate a lie, like I did in the malachi's prophecy.

The Truth which seems clearly avoided in that post by making people question things they have no answer to then giving them answers they can't easily verify (who I am, my love for Christ?) indirectly calling them gullible.

https://www.nairaland.com/3992834/malachis-prophecy

Bringing an off thread post here was to prove what?, instead of bringing the truth!

Distraction is a potent weapon of the devil. The Devil has good doesn't mean He is good, even a trap must be set with good meal. The devil is no fool, HE'S CALLED A DECEIVER, by lying he is not the devil and tell you, the devil is completely evil, so you believe he is not, when he offers to help you. Those who worship Satan, demons unknowing, our forefathers weren't fools, they were deceiving because the good he brings he hides within it great evil. To deceive is to hide, what better way to hide evil than presenting it as good.

That post by oaroloye is just a distraction and a good choice, deceptively anyway, to anyone who wants to take the easy way and not discover the true way

Apologies my friends, but hardwork pays and there is gain in studying. I love you all, don't need verify who you are before as long as God loves you.

oaroloye in anyway your questions still remain questions, it's because I have deemed it fit not to dignify it with an answer. Thank you

TheLordIsGr8:
Such topic hardly receive attention. I'm not just talking about the veracity of its claims (everyone ought to reach his/her conclusion). But it has presented a viewpoint which should be debated. But don't expect our people to actually have time for this sort of thing.

We have millions of "graduates" who can't endure the torture of reading 3,000 written words. e too long. Really? They want everything in "tweet" size. Give me the headline and forget the rest.

This is very troubling


preccy69 over to you. Land here after church.

I completely understand that people are busy and it takes great patience to read through it, so I have highlighted parts of the article for quick study.

Thanks