₦airaland Forum

If we approach the New Testament by lifting verses from various letters and putting them together, we can build a case that tithing is a New Testament practice. And therefore we can tell God's people that they must tithe. But if you look at the story of the first-century church, you will discover that the Christians did not pay tithes. It is not there, brothers. It is not there. I will add something to this. The early Christians recognized that the tithe was part of the Old Covenant. The tithe was Israel's income tax to support the temple and to help the Levites, who were not given an inheritance. But it was also for the purpose of supporting the widows, the fatherless, the poor, and the strangers. This rarely gets mentioned when ministers preach on tithing today. Nevertheless, Jesus Christ has put to death that whole system. Today, all of us, all of God's people, are functioning priests. We, the church--God's people--are the temple. Now here is something that I don't think any of you know. Historically, you cannot find any Christians tithing until the eighth century! The eighth century. This is historical fact. The Christians in the first century did not tithe. The Christians in the second century did not tithe. The Christians in the third century did not tithe. It wasn't until 700 years passed that tithing became a Christian institution. But that's not all. Brothers, it wasn't until the fourth century--under Constantine the Roman emperor who converted to Christianity and made a Christian state out of the Empire--it wasn't until Constantine that the church had a paid clergy. Church leaders did not receive a salary from God's people until the days of Constantine. Do you understand? Tithes were not practiced among the Christians until eight hundred years passed. It was not part of the first-century church's practice. It was part of the Law. And we have been freed from the Law. I know that Melchizedek was given tithes by Abraham. And I understand that this happened before the Law. But, brothers, may I make this observation? Abraham gave tithes to Melchizedek one time. So if you wish to hang tithing around the neck of God's people by using Abraham, then you can only use it to support a one-time tithe.

[Hebrews 7]:2. If the strict legal course of tithing be intended, it cannot be proved from this text [Hebrews 7] nor from any other instance before the law;

[Genesis 14:18-20] … for Abraham gave only the tenth of the spoils, which were not tithe-able by law. For if the places taken or destroyed in war were anathematized, as Jericho was, and also Amalek, no portion was to be reserved, under a pretense of sacrifice or any other sacred use; as Saul found to his cost. And if they were not anathematized, all the spoils were left entirely unto the people that went to war, without any sacred decimation. So the Reubenites and the Gadites, at their return over Jordan into their own land, carried all their rich spoils and cattle with them, no tithe being mentioned, Joshua 22:8; — although there is no question but many of them offered their freewill offerings at the tabernacle.

And when God would have a sacred portion out of the spoils, as he would have in the wilderness, out of those that were taken from the Midianites, to manifest that they fell not under the law of tithes, he took not the tenth part, but one portion of five hundred from the soldiers, and one of fifty from the people, Numbers 31:28-30. Wherefore the giving of the tenth of the spoils was not from the obligation of any law, but was an act of free-will and choice in the offerer.

But yet there was so great an equity herein also, — namely, that God should have an acknowledgment in the fruits of those successes which he gave in war, — that out of the spoils of his and his people’s enemies David made his provision for the building of the temple. And the captains of the host that went against Midian, after a tribute was raised for the Lord out of the spoils according unto the proportions mentioned, when they found the goodness of God in the preservation of their soldiers, whereof there was not one lost, they made a new voluntary oblation unto God out of their spoils, Numbers 31:48-50.

[Genesis 28] And as for the instance of Jacob, who vowed unto God the tenth of all, it is so far from proving that the tenth was due by virtue of any law, that it proves the contrary. For had it been so, it could not have been the matter of an extraordinary vow, whereby he could express his obedience unto God.

[Matthew 23:23] 3. The precise law of tithing is not confirmed in the gospel. For that saying of our Savior’s approving the tithing of mint and cummin, evidently respects that legal institution which was then in force, and could not be violated without sin. And by his approbation of that law, and of the duty in observance of it, he did no more confirm it, or ascribe an obligatory power unto it under the gospel, than he did so unto all those other ceremonial institutions which both he himself observed as a man made under the law, and enjoined others so to do. They all continued in full force “until the time of reformation,” which gave them their bounds and limits, Hebrews 9:10, and ended with his resurrection. His other saying, of “giving unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s,” respects our whole moral obedience unto God, and not this or that particular institution. The meaning of it is, that we are to pay or perform unto God all whatever he requireth of us in a way of obedience; but what that is in particular, is not here determined. And other mention of tithes in the gospel there is none.

4. [1] Whereas by the light of nature, all rules of reason and positive institutions, a portion of what God is pleased to give unto every may, is to be returned unto him, in the way of his worship and service, wherein it may be used according unto his appointment; and [2] whereas before the giving of the law sundry holy men fixed on the tenth part, as that which was (meet) to be so dedicated unto God, and that, as is probable, not without some especial conduct of the Holy Spirit, if not upon express revelation; [3] and whereas this was afterwards expressly confirmed under the law by positive institution, [4] the equity whereof is urged in the gospel; (5) it is the best direction that can be given unto any what proportion of their estate should be set apart unto this purpose.

Herein, I confess, so many circumstances axe in particular cases to be considered, as that it is impossible any one certain rule should be prescribed unto all persons.

But whereas withal there is no need in the least to furnish men with pleas and excuses for the non-performance of their duty, at least as unto the necessary degrees of it, I shall not suggest any thing unto them which may be used to that purpose. I shall therefore leave this rule in its full latitude, as the best direction of practice in this matter.

[1 Cor 9] . On these suppositions it is that the apostle, treating of this matter, makes no use of the right or law of tithing, though directly unto his purpose if it had not been abrogated. For intending to prove that the ministers of the gospel ought to be liberally supported in their work with the earthly things of them unto whom they do administer the things of God … … [Paul]argueth from the light of nature, the general equity of other cases, the analogy of legal institutions, the rules of justice, with the especial institution of Christ in the gospel, but makes no mention of the natural or legal right of tithing, 1 Corinthians 9ff

striktlymi: Apologies DB,

I must confess that I did not read the OP as I should have...

Anyways, your response was very helpful in making your viewpoint on the matter clearer....

I quite agree with your views on tithing to a large extent but still I do not think that one who wants to tithe of his own free will should be discouraged from doing so...

It would be right however, to discourage anyone who tithe for the wrong reasons and I must confess that it would be very difficult to see one who tithe for good reasons but still there are people who tithe because of the love they have for God...this in my view is not wrong.

Rom 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
Rom 14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
Rom 14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

Sproul: The New Testament does teach us, however, that the new covenant is superior to the old covenant. It is a covenant that gives more blessings to us than the old covenant did. It is a covenant that with its manifold blessings imposes greater responsibilities than the Old Testament did. If anything, the structure of the new covenant requires a greater commitment to financial stewardship before God than that which was required in the old covenant.

Sproul: That is to say, the starting point of Christian giving is the tithe. The tithe is not an ideal that only a few people reach but rather should be the base minimum from which we progress.

Sproul: Church history also bears witness that many in the early church did not consider the tithe as having been abrogated in the new covenant.

Sproul: One of the earliest (turn of the second century) extrabiblical documents that survives to this day is the book of the Didache. The Didache gives practical instruction for Christian living. In the Didache, the principle of the giving of the first fruits or the tithe is mentioned as a basic responsibility for every Christian.

Sproul: A second argument that people give to avoid the tithe is that they “cannot afford it.” What that statement really means is that they cannot pay their tithe and pay all the other expenses they have incurred.

Sproul: Again, in their minds the tithe is the last resort in the budget. Their giving to God is something that is at the bottom of their list of priorities. It’s a weak argument before God to say, “Lord, I didn’t tithe because I couldn’t afford it” — especially when we consider that the poorest among us has a higher standard of living than ninety-nine percent of the people who have ever walked on the face of the earth.

Sproul: There are many more excuses that people give to avoid this responsibility, yet the New Testament tells us: “Let the thief no longer steal” (Eph. 2:28a).

Sproul: If we have been guilty of stealing from God in the past by withholding our tithe from Him, that behavior must cease immediately and give way to a resolution to begin tithing at once, no matter what it costs.

Sproul: It’s an interesting phenomenon in the life of the church, that people who in 1960 gave a dollar to the offering plate every week, still give that same dollar today. Everything else in their living costs has been adjusted to inflation except their giving. We also have to remind ourselves that if we give gifts to God, we cannot call them tithes if these gifts fall beneath the level of ten percent.

Sproul: One of the sad realities of failure to tithe is that in so doing we not only are guilty of robbing God, but we also rob ourselves of the joy of giving and of the blessings that follow from it. I have yet to meet a person who tithes who has expressed to me regret for being one who tithes. On the contrary, I hear from them not a sense of judgment towards those who don’t give but rather a sense of compassion toward them. Frequently, I hear tithers saying, “People who don’t tithe just don’t know what they’re missing.”

Sproul: It is a cliché and a truism that you can’t out-give God. That statement has become a cliché because it is so true.

Sproul: In the text in Malachi, we find something exceedingly rare coming from the lips of God. Here God challenges His people to put Him to a test: “Put me to the test, says the LORD of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need” (3:10).

Sproul: Have you put God to that test? Have you tried Him to see if He will not open heaven itself and empty His own treasuries upon you? We need to stop robbing Him and thus receive from Him the blessing that He promises.

Sproul: Dr. R.C. Sproul is founder and president of Ligonier Ministries and senior minister of preaching and teaching at Saint Andrew's in Sanford, Florida, and he is author of the book Faith Alone.

Sproul: For more than thirty years, Dr. R.C. Sproul has thoroughly and concisely analyzed weighty theological, philosophical, and biblical topics in Right Now Counts Forever, drawing out practical applications for the Christian in his own engaging style.

Sproul: God answers his question, “Will man rob God?” saying, “Yet you are robbing me.” The Israelite response is: “How have we robbed you?” To which God replies, “In your tithes and contributions” (Malachi 3:.

Sproul: God announces that to withhold the full measure of the tithe that He requires from His people is to be guilty of robbing God Himself.

Sproul: Because of this, He pronounces a curse upon the whole nation and commands them afresh to bring to Him all of the tithe.

Sproul: When we think of tithing in Old Testament categories, we understand that the requirement involves returning to God the first fruits of one’s prosperity.

Sproul: We are required to give ten percent of our gross annual income or gain.

Sproul: If a shepherd’s flock produced ten new lambs, the requirement was that one of those lambs be offered to God. This offering is from the top.

Sproul: It is not an offering that is given after other expenses are met or after other taxes have been paid.

Sproul: … ninety-six percent of professing evangelical Christians regularly, systematically, habitually, and impenitently rob God of what belongs to Him.

Sproul: It also means that ninety-six percent of us are for this reason exposing ourselves to a divine curse upon our lives.

Sproul: Whether this percentage is accurate, one thing is certain — it is clear that the overwhelming majority of professing evangelical Christians do not tithe. This immediately raises the question: “Why?” How is it possible that somebody who has given his life to Christ can withhold their financial gifts from Him? I have heard many excuses or explanations for this.

Sproul: The most common is the assertion that the tithe is part of the Old Testament law that has passed away with the coming of the New Testament.

Sproul: This statement is made routinely in spite of the complete lack of New Testament evidence for it. Nowhere in the New Testament does it teach us that the principle of the tithe has been abrogated.

Bidam: If you can't show me,then you have no case sire.

OLAADEGBU: You can see that his only evidence is that he heard it cited by someone, and this is what they base their convictions on.

” According to this lowest rule of Christian prudence, if a man when he has or gains one pound give a tenth to God, when he has or gains an hundred he will give the tenth of this also. And yet I show unto you a more excellent way. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. Stint yourself to no proportion at all. But lend to God all you can.
"On the Use of Money" from a sermon preached in 1744):?give all you can; or in other words, give all you have to God. Do not stint yourself, like a Jew rather than a Christian, to this or that proportion. Render unto God not a tenth, not a third, not half, but all that is God's (be it more or less) by employing all on yourself, your household, the household of faith and all mankind, in such a manner that you may give a good account of your stewardship when ye can be no longer stewards...”

It (tithing) is not mentioned in the New Testament except where it is describing Old Testament practices or in the Gospels where Jesus is addressing people who were under the Old Testament law. Note Jesus' comments to the Pharisees in Luke 11:42? A New Testament teaching on giving which may be helpful to you is found in 1 Corinthians 16:2.... This passage brings out four points: we should give individually, regularly, methodically, and proportionately. The matter of your giving is between you and God, and He always takes into account our circumstances. He knows when they are beyond our power to direct and control. The important thing is that we see giving as a privilege and not a burden. It should not be out of a sense of duty, but rather out of love for the Lord and a desire to see His kingdom advanced. Second Corinthians 9:6-7..... What has priority in our lives? Is Christ really first--or do we put ourselves and our own desires first? Make sure Christ is first in your life, and then ask Him to guide you. Note: Billy Graham himself does teach tithing. http://www.billygraham.org/LFA_Article.asp?ArticleID=28

In a sermon preached on August 27, 1525 Dr. Martin Luther used the same Old Covenant/New Covenant hermeneutics presented in this book to oppose tithing. His were not out of context or random remarks about the Law and tithing. Rather Dr. Luther was speaking precisely to the point because his sermon title was How Christians Should Regard Moses. The entire document can be found using Internet search engines. A few excerpts: “The Law of Moses Binds Only the Jews and Not the Gentiles. Here the Law of Moses has its place. It is no longer binding on us because it was given only to the people ofIsrael. And Israel accepted this law for itself and its descendants, while the Gentiles were excluded.” “Moses has nothing to do with us. If I were to accept Moses in one commandment, I would have to accept the entire Moses.” “We will not regard him as our lawgiver - unless he agrees with both the New Testament and the natural law.” “For not one little period in Moses pertains to us.” “But the other commandments of Moses, which are not by nature, the Gentiles do not hold. Nor do these pertain to the Gentiles, such as the TITHE and others equally fine which I wish we had too.”

***Calvin argued, "I would have preferred to pass over this matter in utter silence if I were not aware that here many dangerously go astray. For there are some who deny that a commonwealth is duly framed which neglects the political system of Moses, and is ruled by the common laws of nations. Let other men consider how perilous and seditious this notion is; it will be enough for me to have proved it false and foolish . . . It is a fact that the law of God which we call the moral law is nothing else than a testimony of natural law and of that conscience which God has engraved upon the minds of men. Consequently, the entire scheme of this equity of which we are now speaking has been prescribed in it. Hence, this equity alone must be the goal and rule and limit of all laws. Whatever laws shall be framed to that rule, directed to that goal, bound by that limit, there is no reason why we should disapprove of them, howsoever they may differ from the Jewish law, or among themselves . . . For the statement of some, that the law of God given through Moses is dishonored when it is abrogated and new laws preferred to it, is utterly vain. For others are not preferred to it when they are more approved, not by a simple comparison, but with regard to the condition of times, place, and nation; or when that law is abrogated which was never enacted for us. For the Lord through the hand of Moses did not give that law to be proclaimed among all nations and to be in force everywhere; but when he had taken the Jewish nation into his safekeeping, defense, and protection, he also willed to be a lawgiver especially to it; and -- as became a wise lawgiver -- he had special concern for it in making its laws.

“But you are not under a system similar to that by which the Jews were obliged to pay tithes to the priests. If there were any such rule laid down in the Gospel, it would destroy the beauty of spontaneous giving and take away all the bloom from the fruit of your liberality! There is no law to tell me what I should give my father on his birthday. There is no rule laid down in any law book to decide what present a husband should give to his wife, nor what token of affection we should bestow upon others whom we love. No, the gift must be a free one, or it has lost all its sweetness.”

And just before Olaadegbu and his fellow judaizers begin to grin from ear to ear, note that the fact that Luther spoke against antinmonians does not mean he was legalistic. Luther taught justification by faith and insisted the word 'alone' must be added to Romans 1:16;17, because the German language demanded it.

Luther taught against legalism. It is believed that the church of Rome still hoped he will return but when he married, the nail was fixed on the coffin of his return.

Luther taught against tithing, as well as Calvin, Spurgeon and a host of other renowned gospel teachers.

Justification by faith means simply our salvation is sealed in God: nothing we can ever do or not do can change that status. Just as Adam sinned and we became sinners without doing anything ourselves, so also Jesus died and rose that we may be righteous without anything we can do to add to it.

This is no basis for licenciousness. Because he that is justified must show it by his works according to James.

Bidam:
I will be very glad if you could show me the article where Luther and Charles Spurgoen spoke against the tithes.Thanks in anticipation.

If I give you the reference you request for, O Bidam, will it make U change your position on the tithe?

This is not a tithe thread. I made reference to tithe only as I discussed antinomianism. But if U are still intent on knowing, Mr Russel, who debated Rev. Ewuosho, on tithing, said it in his opening remarks of the debate to show that many renowned men of God of old rejected the tithing doctrine as espoused today.

But we all know men's words are not our final authority but scripture. But God still uses men.

If, however, O most blessed Bidam, U think those men didn't oppose tithing, can U pls provide us a link or quote anywhere that support that position *return to sender*.

OLAADEGBU: The chief antinomian of NL is back with a bang. You are welcome back after being away for a season.

frosbel: Thanks Bro, You could not have said it any better.

Just to add , the post was a mixture of sarcasm and truth, hope you understand - thanks.

Pro 6:16 These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him:

Pro 6:17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

Pro 6:18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

Pro 6:19 A false witness [that] speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

OLAADEGBU: The difference is clear.

sheniqua:

What is the difference?

The Tithe is Illegal

by Gary Amirault

When I say "illegal," I certainly do not mean from the government’s point of view. The American federal government has been extremely generous in allowing religious organizations almost free hands in their money raising endeavors, even to the point of giving them many kinds of tax advantages. By illegal, I mean that God never authorized Christian leaders to take a tithe from God’s people. One will not find the modern church tithe authorized in the Old Covenant, nor in the New Covenant. Certainly, church historians are in agreement, when they say that tithing was not practiced by the early believers.

The tithe is a subject that is very dear to most church leaders. Those denominations that can get their members to actually bring in a full 10% of gross income can create very powerful forces far beyond their strength in numbers. The leading "tithing" sects according to an article in Christian Ministry, are interestingly what Evangelicals would term "cults." The Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and the World Wide Church of God are the leading givers. The fourth is the Assemblies of God. Recently, the World Wide Church of God abandoned the tithe as un-Scriptural. Donations dropped 30 per cent in the first year. (While the article in Christian Ministry lists the Jehovah's Witneses among leading tithing denominations, I've since been informed by that organization that Jehovah's Witnesses do not practice tithing.)

According to Newsweek, most church members give far less than 10%, most giving under 2 per cent. Not surprising is the fact that the poor give a far greater portion of their income than the rich. USA Today (Oct. 25, 1990) tells us that families earning less than $10,000 give 5.5 per cent of their income to charity (not necessarily to church). Families earning between $50,000 and $60,000 give only 1.7% of their earnings.

We hope to show in this book that while many church fund-raising organizations and Christian financial counseling ministries tell us that not paying "the tithe" is robbing God, the actual Biblical facts are that those who teach tithing as a Christian doctrine are, in fact, the ones who are "robbing God." As we go through this article, keep in mind the above statistic that the poor far out-give the rich percentage-wise.

I am going to make a statement that will probably shock many Christians who have been in church for a long period of time and feel they know the Bible pretty well. I hope this statement encourages the reader to "see for themselves" that this statement is 100 per cent Biblically true. My hope is that when we see how far off Scriptural ground we have come in such basic Christian teachings as giving, we will renew our desire to study to "show ourselves approved." Here is the statement: The tithe as taught by most Christian denominations as being 10 per cent of gross or net income is not contained on the pages of the Bible!

Many Christian publications say that those who do not tithe are robbing God and will suffer curses for not doing so. I am going to use one of them as an example of what Scriptures and reasoning are usually used to support the idea that the church is full of God robbers, that is, people who do not tithe 10 per cent of their income.

A booklet entitled Tithes, Offering, and Alms states: "Today many churches do not teach tithing because they do not want to drive people away. In reality they are robbing God’s people of their blessing. When tithing is not taught, they are allowing their people to ignorantly rob God. By this they allow the devourer to have free access to their people. Then the church and the people wonder why they are not being blessed. When God’s people return again unto God, He will return unto them as He has promised."

By this minister’s own reasoning then, the Churches of the world are full of "God-robbers." The vast majority of Christians do not even come close to giving ten per cent of their income. Most churches are overflowing with "God-robbers."

While this booklet Tithes, Offerings, and Alms deals with more than just the tithe, we will only focus on the tithe since that is the subject of this article.

I am not mentioning the author of this work hoping in days ahead he will see the foolishness of what he wrote.

In one small paragraph, this minister condemned to the devourer entire congregations who do not tithe. As long as people do not tithe, he says, they have turned their backs to God and He cannot bless them. They are God robbers! The booklet I just quoted is very typical of publications like this. They all refer to the same handful of Scriptures to justify their position.

I will use this one as an example of which Scriptures are used to support their view and then show how these Scriptures have not only been grossly taken out of context, but even these Scriptures out of context do not support the teaching of tithing being 10% of income.

We will then study the history of tithing in the Old Testament, the early church view on the subject, and what we believe is the correct Biblical view on giving.

What Saith the Scriptures?

Those who teach that Christians are obligated to tithe can be categorized into two main groups: 1. those who say we are still under the Mosaic Law or portions of it; 2. those who say the tithe is part of the Abrahamic Covenant which is pre-Mosaic. The latter group says the Abrahamic Covenant, being a covenant of faith, is valid for the church. They say Abraham was a tither. Therefore, we should tithe.

Let us deal first with the pre-Mosaic arguments. This teaching is used by those ministries who have taught the Mosaic Law is done away with and therefore cannot be put upon Christians. They are correct regarding the Mosaic Law having passed away.

(We cannot get into this subject fully because it would take up too much space, but a handful of Scriptures might be helpful to those who disagree on this point. See 2 Cor. 3:11,13; Hebrews 8:13; Gal. 4:21-26; really all of Galatians and Hebrews.)

Briefly, the Old Covenant (Mosaic Covenant) was a two-sided agreement between Israel and Yahweh in which Yahweh would bless them if they kept their part of the agreement and He would curse them if they didn’t. It was an all or nothing package. A person was not allowed to turn this agreement into a smorgasbord, picking and choosing what suited one’s religious diet. They could not choose what to keep and what to throw out. James 2:10 tells us that "whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all."

Almost all denominations of Christianity have taken portions of the Mosaic Covenant, "Christened them," and added them to the New Covenant. Without being aware of it, this has made most Christians guilty of the whole Mosaic Law, which says it all must be kept. At the same time, they have "fallen from grace" because of mixing it with a covenant which no longer serves a purpose for those under the New Covenant. This is not to say that we cannot learn many wonderful truths from the Mosaic Law. We are just no longer in covenantal relationship with God through that covenant. We are in covenantal relationship with God through a New Covenant ratified by Jesus Christ, not Moses.

The fact that most denominations of Christendom have not understood this vital point has caused us to fall from "grace through faith," the very power of the New Covenant itself. What is tragic is that most Christians are not even aware of this "falling away" which has been going on for hundreds of years. Most denominations have mixed the Mosaic Covenant instituted by Moses with the New Covenant, which is the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. (Rom. 8:2) One covenant brought death (and always will); the other brought Life. If you believe any of the Old Covenant is still binding to a believer in Christ, read what Paul has to say in 2 Corinthians chapter three verses four through eighteen about the cornerstone of the Mosaic Covenant, that is, the Ten Commandments. This should cure anyone of binding themselves to the "ministry of death." The consequences of this mixture have been catastrophic. A careful non-biased survey of church history should reveal what this mixture has produced. While this paper is not about Mosaic Law versus Grace, I felt the subject had to be touched somewhat. Back to the subject at hand.

Is the "tithe" Pre-Mosaic?

Now let us deal with the teaching that says that the Biblical tithe was pre-Mosaic.

Abel

The first place we come across offerings of any kind is in Genesis 4:3-7. Cain brought forth an offering from the fruit of the ground to the LORD and Abel brought the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. The LORD respected Abel and his offering, but He did not respect Cain and his offering, which caused Cain to become very angry.

Most Christians who teach tithing would also consider themselves Bible literalists, that is, they are opposed to "spiritualizing" the Scriptures. However, when we get down to some of their pet doctrines, we find that literalists often quickly abandon their "literalism" and "spiritualize."

In Genesis 4:3, the passage mentioned above, there is not a hint as to the amount being offered. Both fruit of the ground and flocks are acceptable offerings. One could point out that Abel brought blood and Cain did not. One could perhaps make something of the fact that Abel gave of his "first-born" while nothing is said about Cain’s offering. We could attempt to "spiritualize" here, but if we let the Scripture stand as it is with a "literal" interpretation, we do not have a "Biblical tithe" here. We have two offerings; one acceptable—one unacceptable.

Abraham

We have to travel 2000 years ahead in history to find another trace of offerings to the LORD. We come to Abraham and His offering to Melchizedek, the king of Salem. I want to make an emphatic point here as we analyze this portion of Scripture. As I said before, literalists are not very literal. If true "spiritual" understanding comes from a "literal" approach, then Scriptures such as the following do not make much sense: "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are "spiritually discerned." (1 Cor. 2:14) If the Bible can be understood with the natural mind using a "literalist" approach to the Bible, then the above Scripture is not true. The fact is, the Scriptures and the things of God need to be "spiritually discerned." They are "foolishness" to the "natural mind." Even Christians can be naturally, carnally, fleshly minded. "And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ." (1 Cor. 3:1) A Christian, while claiming to be a literalist, who finds himself having to add to or subtract from Scriptures to make them fit into their doctrines, is still very carnal. The next portion of Scripture we will look at will bear this out.

There are those who say that, while we are not under the Mosaic Law, we Christians, are children of faith. Our father in this faith is Abraham. (So far so good.) Then comes the nice little carnal step which shows how unliteral "literalists" can be. They say that Abraham was a tither and therefore we must be tithers. Well, let us be literalists for a moment and look at that Scripture to see what it "literally" says.

The 14th Chapter of Genesis deals with a battle between 9 kings, five against four. The first part of Chapter 14, is very difficult to understand. The King James Bible does not tell us, but the Jewish Bible called the Tanakh (which is the Old Testament) tells us that some of the meaning of the Hebrew in this Chapter is uncertain. (It seems the Jews are more honest in their translating than some Christian Bible translators.)

Abram, with 318 of his men, went after the four kings who spoiled the king of Sodom and the king of Gomorrah. Abram defeated the kings, and set his nephew Lot free. On the way back with all the spoils of war, the king of Sodom met Abram in the king’s valley. Here a mysterious king of Salem, priest of the God Most High, brought out bread and wine and blessed Abram. Abram then gave a tenth of those spoils to Melchizedek.

At this point, the king of Sodom told Abram to take everything except the people. It is not clear in the text whose goods and people are involved here. The armies which Abram defeated had attacked several other kingdoms before they spoiled Sodom and Gomorrah. When Abram defeated them, he must have collected a tremendous amount of wealth plus people which could be turned into slaves.

For the rest of the article: http://www.tentmaker.org/books/TheTitheisIllegal.html

Deeper_danNY: Drummerboy, Drummerboy! With who and why? what made you think DeeperLife owes you some explanation. You want me to appeal to you because Pastor Kumuyi sinned against you and your company

jlounge: DL is still none of your business

jlounge: DL is none of your business

frosbel:

What my children do or do not do is up to them and their relationship with GOD.

Image123: Oh but kumuyi and his children are all your business and must be punished. You are an hypocrite after judgment like the pharisees.