Exploring the idea of my last video a little further. I take a look at how the wrong premise about what the Christian life is all about leads to skewed views of various scriptures. When the premise is that we're supposed to always be teaching each other "what to do," then we often miss the point entirely. I look at one passage in particular, Hebrews 7, to show how the church has honed in on a certain aspect of "doing" and has missed the point of the passage entirely! My hope in all this is to highlight the love, grace and goodness of God!
Grace Roots Blog
Showing posts with label Melchizedek. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Melchizedek. Show all posts
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Freed from Tithing, Free to Give - Part 8
The New Covenant is not a continuation of the Old Covenant, nor is it related to the Old Covenant in any way. The Old Covenant was weak and unprofitable (Hebrews 7:18) because it could make nothing perfect, and therefore a New Covenant was needed that was completely different than the Old Covenant. The Old Covenant had many high priests who had to offer sacrifices often for their own sins and for the sins of the people, but in the New Covenant we have One High Priest, "who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens" (Hebrews 7:26) and who offered Himself up "once for all" (Hebrews 7:27).
In this series we've talked about the Levite tribe and priests who received the tithes that their fellow Jews from the other eleven tribes brought to support them. The New Covenant is a matter of a completely different Priesthood. There is no such thing as a set-apart "tribe" or group of Christian "priests" who are sanctioned to perform sacrifices or offerings or other duties that are a part of the covenant. In this covenant, ALL of the work has been done by One High Priest, Jesus. Please understand that the duties and functions of the Old Covenant priests were not carried over into the New Covenant in any way, shape or form. Why? Because it was all done away with (annulled - Heb 7:18, made obsolete - Heb 8:13) and the work of the New Covenant was all fulfilled (nothing left undone) in the finished work of Jesus.
In this New Covenant, ALL Christians are a new breed of priests. We are not a physical priesthood, but rather we are "a spiritual house, a holy priesthood" (1 Peter 2:5). We don't offer up physical sacrifices to God, but rather "spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (also 1 Peter 2:5). We are "a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people..." (1 Peter 2:9).
In the New Covenant there is no "tabernacle" nor "storehouse," nor anything that resembles them. Please don't tell me a church building is a modern day equivalent to the Old Covenant tabernacle! "The church" is not a place. It's not a building nor a location. It's true that local bodies of Christians gather together to meet in buildings, but these buildings are not tabernacles, and they are not storehouses and they are not "the house of God." The "house of God" is the people in whom He dwells. It is a spiritual house, not a physical house (see Eph 2:19-22). Again, we are a royal, spiritual priesthood.
This royal priesthood is one body. This one body of new-creation priests (including you and me!) happens to have many parts (see Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12), and each "part" has specific functions and giftings within the body - but none of the parts are set apart for ministry in any sense like the Levites were. Rather all the parts "are individually members of one another" (Rom 12:5), and each part is to minister to one another for the profit of all, according to the gifts given them by the grace of God (1 Cor 12:7, 1 Peter 4:10, Romans 12:6).
Let's let that sink in a little. One body, many parts. All parts individually members of one another. All parts ministering to one another for the profit of all. Can we see from this that the body of Christ - the spiritual house of God - is nothing like the Levitical system in which one tribe required the support of tithes from all the other tribes. In Christ, the entire body is to support the ministry of the entire body.
Now, Paul does indeed say that God "gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers." Does Paul lift these people up as being higher on the totem pole than other members of the body of Christ? Does Paul say that they are an extra-special type of "priest?" Of course not! The people in today's church seem to lift them higher, but as far as I can see in scripture they are simply playing their part in the body just like all the other parts are doing!
In 1 Timothy 5, Paul talks about "elders who rule well" being counted worthy of double honor, "especially those who labor in the word and doctrine." Now, instead of getting into what all of this means, I'll simply point out what it doesn't mean. None of it has anything to do with bringing a "tithe" of income or of any other physical possession to "a church." Can it mean that other members of the body can give a portion of income, or food, or possessions to support those people? I'm sure it can mean that. But the point is that there is no set amount (such as a "tithe"), and it's most certainly not based upon anything that has to do with the Old Covenant Levite/tithing system!
This has gone long so we'll pick it up in Part 9, where we'll finally begin to wrap up this series with a couple of posts on "true Christian giving."
Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
In this series we've talked about the Levite tribe and priests who received the tithes that their fellow Jews from the other eleven tribes brought to support them. The New Covenant is a matter of a completely different Priesthood. There is no such thing as a set-apart "tribe" or group of Christian "priests" who are sanctioned to perform sacrifices or offerings or other duties that are a part of the covenant. In this covenant, ALL of the work has been done by One High Priest, Jesus. Please understand that the duties and functions of the Old Covenant priests were not carried over into the New Covenant in any way, shape or form. Why? Because it was all done away with (annulled - Heb 7:18, made obsolete - Heb 8:13) and the work of the New Covenant was all fulfilled (nothing left undone) in the finished work of Jesus.
In this New Covenant, ALL Christians are a new breed of priests. We are not a physical priesthood, but rather we are "a spiritual house, a holy priesthood" (1 Peter 2:5). We don't offer up physical sacrifices to God, but rather "spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (also 1 Peter 2:5). We are "a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people..." (1 Peter 2:9).
In the New Covenant there is no "tabernacle" nor "storehouse," nor anything that resembles them. Please don't tell me a church building is a modern day equivalent to the Old Covenant tabernacle! "The church" is not a place. It's not a building nor a location. It's true that local bodies of Christians gather together to meet in buildings, but these buildings are not tabernacles, and they are not storehouses and they are not "the house of God." The "house of God" is the people in whom He dwells. It is a spiritual house, not a physical house (see Eph 2:19-22). Again, we are a royal, spiritual priesthood.
This royal priesthood is one body. This one body of new-creation priests (including you and me!) happens to have many parts (see Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12), and each "part" has specific functions and giftings within the body - but none of the parts are set apart for ministry in any sense like the Levites were. Rather all the parts "are individually members of one another" (Rom 12:5), and each part is to minister to one another for the profit of all, according to the gifts given them by the grace of God (1 Cor 12:7, 1 Peter 4:10, Romans 12:6).
Let's let that sink in a little. One body, many parts. All parts individually members of one another. All parts ministering to one another for the profit of all. Can we see from this that the body of Christ - the spiritual house of God - is nothing like the Levitical system in which one tribe required the support of tithes from all the other tribes. In Christ, the entire body is to support the ministry of the entire body.
Now, Paul does indeed say that God "gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers." Does Paul lift these people up as being higher on the totem pole than other members of the body of Christ? Does Paul say that they are an extra-special type of "priest?" Of course not! The people in today's church seem to lift them higher, but as far as I can see in scripture they are simply playing their part in the body just like all the other parts are doing!
In 1 Timothy 5, Paul talks about "elders who rule well" being counted worthy of double honor, "especially those who labor in the word and doctrine." Now, instead of getting into what all of this means, I'll simply point out what it doesn't mean. None of it has anything to do with bringing a "tithe" of income or of any other physical possession to "a church." Can it mean that other members of the body can give a portion of income, or food, or possessions to support those people? I'm sure it can mean that. But the point is that there is no set amount (such as a "tithe"), and it's most certainly not based upon anything that has to do with the Old Covenant Levite/tithing system!
This has gone long so we'll pick it up in Part 9, where we'll finally begin to wrap up this series with a couple of posts on "true Christian giving."
Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Freed from Tithing, Free to Give - Part 7
Matthew 23 and Luke 11
In this part we'll look at the tithes as mentioned in the New Testament. We'll start with these two passages in which we see Jesus harshly rebuking the Pharisees, who, of course, fancied themselves as keepers of the law but were in reality steeped in self-righteousness and hypocrisy. Jesus brought up many different complaints against them, including their faithfulness in tithing while yet ignoring other parts of the law.
Here's my point in all this: If we're to take Jesus' words to the Pharisees about tithing as teachings for Christians to follow, then shouldn't we follow ALL of what Jesus spoke to the Pharisees? Read Matthew 23 and Luke 11 and tell me that you think it should be taught in the Christian church! But of course, Jesus wasn't giving a "Christian" teaching here, was He! He was teaching law to those who were under the law.
Like I've previously mentioned more than once, it seems again to be the case that Christians who teach "the tithe" disregard all of the surrounding words and instructions, and zoom in solely on the tithe. I've tried not to be too strong in my language in this series, but is it not evident that all of this is a gross negligence of context and a vast straying away from the true meaning of all of these scriptures?
The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
In Luke 18, Jesus spoke this parable "to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others" (Luke 18:9). Read the full parable in Luke 18:10-14. Not much is needed to say here in regards to the purpose of this series. It simply shows that the Pharisee, who faithfully tithed, is not the one who was justified.
Hebrews 7
I briefly mentioned this passage in Part 2 when I was talking about Abram's tithe to Melchizedek, and we'll go a little bit more in depth here. We really need to start at the beginning of Hebrews to get the full gist of what the writer is saying. At the very least, go back to chapter 5 where the writer begins to write about Melchizedek or chapter 6 where the writer begins to talk about "perfection." But let's quickly look at Hebrews 7:4-10 so we can see how the writer came to his conclusion after verse 11, that perfection could not come through the Levite priesthood, but only through Jesus. I rarely ever use The Living Bible when trying to explain doctrine, but in this case I think it helps to give a better understanding of this passage. After you read this, feel free to also read it in another version:
Think about it. Was the writer of Hebrews giving all this doctrine about a better covenant, a better priesthood, and so on and so forth, and then he suddenly decides, "Oh, I guess I'll drop in a little word to Christians about tithing?" That's silly! His bringing up the Levitical priesthood, and Abram's tithe, and Melchizedek, ALL had to do with his pointing out the weakness of the Old Covenant and the need for, and the superiority of, the New Covenant.
Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
In this part we'll look at the tithes as mentioned in the New Testament. We'll start with these two passages in which we see Jesus harshly rebuking the Pharisees, who, of course, fancied themselves as keepers of the law but were in reality steeped in self-righteousness and hypocrisy. Jesus brought up many different complaints against them, including their faithfulness in tithing while yet ignoring other parts of the law.
Luke 11:42 "But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass by justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.Jesus said that as people who were under the law, they most certainly should bring their tithes, as was mandated under the law. And they had actually done that. However, they had "neglected the weightier matters of the law." As Jesus saw it, they were "whitewashed tombs" who appeared clean from outward appearances but were really "full of dead men's bones and uncleanness" on the inside (Matt 23:27). From outward appearance (including the bringing of the tithes that could be seen by everybody), they looked clean. But yet their negligence in other matters proved that they were only self-righteous hypocrites.
Matt 23:23 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.
Here's my point in all this: If we're to take Jesus' words to the Pharisees about tithing as teachings for Christians to follow, then shouldn't we follow ALL of what Jesus spoke to the Pharisees? Read Matthew 23 and Luke 11 and tell me that you think it should be taught in the Christian church! But of course, Jesus wasn't giving a "Christian" teaching here, was He! He was teaching law to those who were under the law.
Like I've previously mentioned more than once, it seems again to be the case that Christians who teach "the tithe" disregard all of the surrounding words and instructions, and zoom in solely on the tithe. I've tried not to be too strong in my language in this series, but is it not evident that all of this is a gross negligence of context and a vast straying away from the true meaning of all of these scriptures?
The Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
In Luke 18, Jesus spoke this parable "to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others" (Luke 18:9). Read the full parable in Luke 18:10-14. Not much is needed to say here in regards to the purpose of this series. It simply shows that the Pharisee, who faithfully tithed, is not the one who was justified.
Hebrews 7
I briefly mentioned this passage in Part 2 when I was talking about Abram's tithe to Melchizedek, and we'll go a little bit more in depth here. We really need to start at the beginning of Hebrews to get the full gist of what the writer is saying. At the very least, go back to chapter 5 where the writer begins to write about Melchizedek or chapter 6 where the writer begins to talk about "perfection." But let's quickly look at Hebrews 7:4-10 so we can see how the writer came to his conclusion after verse 11, that perfection could not come through the Levite priesthood, but only through Jesus. I rarely ever use The Living Bible when trying to explain doctrine, but in this case I think it helps to give a better understanding of this passage. After you read this, feel free to also read it in another version:
Heb 7:4-10 See then how great this Melchizedek is: Even Abraham, the first and most honored of all God's chosen people, gave Melchizedek a tenth of the spoils he took from the kings he had been fighting. 5 One could understand why Abraham would do this if Melchizedek had been a Jewish priest, for later on God's people were required by law to give gifts to help their priests because the priests were their relatives. 6 But Melchizedek was not a relative, and yet Abraham paid him. Melchizedek placed a blessing upon mighty Abraham, 7 and as everyone knows, a person who has the power to bless is always greater than the person he blesses. 8 The Jewish priests, though mortal, received tithes; but we are told that Melchizedek lives on. 9 One might even say that Levi himself (the ancestor of all Jewish priests, of all who receive tithes), paid tithes to Melchizedek through Abraham. 10 For although Levi wasn't born yet, the seed from which he came was in Abraham when Abraham paid the tithes to Melchizedek. (TLB)In short, what's being said here is that the Levites, although descended from Abraham (born after him), in a sense paid tithes to the High Priest Melchizedek (who is a 'type' of Jesus) through Abraham. Now, in reality they didn't actually pay tithes to Melchizedek, nor is this passage talking about the actual paying of tithes to Melchizedek (nor to Jesus). This passage is using the example of the one-time tithe of Abraham (the lesser) to show how the priesthood of Melchizedek (the greater, who lives forever) is superior to the Levite priesthood (imperfect priests who died) - thereby showing that perfection could not be gained through the Levite priesthood, but that a NEW priesthood was necessary (that of Jesus, whose priesthood is "of the order of Melchizedek"). That's what this passage is about!
Think about it. Was the writer of Hebrews giving all this doctrine about a better covenant, a better priesthood, and so on and so forth, and then he suddenly decides, "Oh, I guess I'll drop in a little word to Christians about tithing?" That's silly! His bringing up the Levitical priesthood, and Abram's tithe, and Melchizedek, ALL had to do with his pointing out the weakness of the Old Covenant and the need for, and the superiority of, the New Covenant.
Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Friday, September 12, 2008
Freed from Tithing, Free to Give - Part 2
How Much Should I Tithe?
The word "tithe" means "one-tenth." A common question that I've heard all throughout my Christian life is, "Should Christians tithe off of their gross income or net income?" Please excuse my incredulity, but come on! - The whole basis of the question is misguided, at best. It assumes that "tithing" is for Christians, and that it has to do with money. Let's begin, through the scriptures, to put those ideas to death. I do want to point out as we get into this that I am differentiating between "giving" and "tithing." "Giving" is part of the Christian's new nature, and is done through grace - just like the rest of the Christian life. Unlike the 10% tithe, "giving" has nothing to do with a set amount or a legally prescribed amount, but rather has much more to do with a cheerful heart that truly desires to give. Christian giving is by no means limited to money, but may involve the giving of possessions, time, talents, services and other resources (we'll get into this later on in the series.) Tithing, however, is a completely different story.
More Than One Tithe
It may come as a surprise to many people that Malachi 3 is really only a small portion of the scriptures that talk about tithing. Did you know that? Judging by all the tithing teachings that I've heard in my life, you'd think that Malachi 3 was "IT" when it comes to the teaching of tithing.
Notice the Malachi passage says "bring all the tithes (plural) into the storehouse." What tithes? And what storehouse? It seems the modern church is ignorant about all this (doesn't really have a clue what this really means) - and in fact has, in its ignorance, turned the Malachi passage into something that it is not. However, Israel - the actual people to whom the laws were given - knew exactly what was meant. Under the system of law that they lived in, many instructions had been given regarding various tithes, and each tithe had various purposes. As we go through them, take note as to whether or not any of them had to do with income or paychecks - or money in any way. Also take note as to the frequency of each tithe (weekly? monthly? yearly? every three years? etc). And take note as to where the tithes were taken to, and how they were distributed and used. And finally, take note as to whether the people had a free choice on whether to tithe or not. (In other words, could they decide in their hearts to give cheerfully, or did they have to give).
Abraham's Tithe
The first mention of a "tithe" in the Bible is in Genesis 14. I'll summarize the story, but make sure you read the story for yourself. It's a quick and easy read. In short, a handful of kings had gone to war against another handful of kings. During a battle, Abraham's nephew, Lot, was captured, along with his family and goods. So Abram planned and executed an attack, and was able to bring back Lot and his family, and all of the goods that had been taken. Then Melchizedek king of Salem blessed Abraham, and Abraham "gave him a tithe of all." (Update: Does "all" mean that Abraham gave a tithe of everything he owned? I wrote this blog post on that subject.)
I don't know how many times I've heard this story used to teach the "principle" of tithing. I've heard it said that it was through "Abraham, the father of our faith," that the principle of tithing was introduced, and so we can follow Abraham's actions as an example of the principle of tithing since we're his children by faith. Well, remember - Abraham's tithe was a one-time tithe. It wasn't something Abraham continued to do, nor did it have anything to do with his salary or employment earnings or wealth. After fighting in a battle and winning back the goods and people that had been taken, he took the spoils of war and offered a tenth of it to Melchizedek. It's that simple.
(Update: Some historians note that it was either a law or custom in that part of the world at that time to give a tithe of the spoils of war to the local king or priest. That is to say, Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek - "king of Salem, priest of the Most High God" - Heb 7:1 - had nothing to do with him having a generous or a giving heart. He was following the local law or custom.)
Tithing Not a "Type" for New Covenant Giving
This one-time tithe of Abraham was never meant to be used to promote or teach a principle of tithing or giving in the New Covenant church. That idea is made up. In fact the writer of Hebrews gleans something out of this story that does have to do with the New Covenant, but it has absolutely nothing to do with Christian giving. You perhaps know that many things in the Old Covenant are "types and shadows" of the "substance" of the New Covenant. It seems that Old Covenant "tithing" and the Old Covenant "storehouse" are reckoned by many as a type and shadow of Christians giving money to a church. But nothing could be further from the truth.
In the book of Hebrews we find Abraham's tithe brought up as part of the writer's explanation of something else... something that has nothing at all to do with tithing. In Chapter 7, Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek is used to show that there was a need for something greater than the Levitical priesthood, which turns out to be the priesthood and sacrifice of Jesus. It says, "Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him." If you read all of Hebrews 7, you'll see that the whole point of Abraham's tithe being brought up has nothing to do with Christians following some principle of tithing, but it has everything to do with showing how Jesus is superior to the Levitical priesthood. More on this in Part 7. The point here is that Abraham's tithe is not used in the New Testament as an example of Christian giving.
Abraham's tithe was not given out of sacrifice or obligation. It wasn't given as a gesture of his good heart, or a heart of faith. It wasn't given as a result of being "convicted" by a sermon on "giving." It wasn't given to a local church or congregation of people of faith. It wasn't given to help a cause. It wasn't given to pay a salary to Melchizedek or his "staff," nor to pay for building costs or church programs. It also had nothing to do with a principle of sowing so that he could reap. Anyone who teaches you any of these things is making it up. Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek was simply a one-time offering from the spoils of war. Let's please take it for what it was, and not make it into something that it wasn't.
Jacob's Voluntary Tithe
In Genesis 28:22, Jacob said to God, "of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to you." This was a voluntary vow to give God a tenth, and it was a conditional vow, starting with the "if" in Gen 28:20. Also, Jacob said this of himself. All of the rest of the people didn't make this same pledge. I don't know of any other examples of the voluntary giving of a tenth. There could be more but I don't know of any. (If you know of any, please let me know). The thing I want to point out is that there is hardly enough evidence, in my opinion, to conclude - or even to merely suggest - that tithing (giving a tenth) was ever meant to be a normal part of the lives of people of faith. It's conjecture at best, with a stark absence of other examples of voluntary tithing in the lives of the Old Testament saints.
We do see plenty of examples of giving all throughout the Bible! Giving is done by all sorts of people in all sorts of ways and in all sorts of sizes and amounts. Giving is done in corporate ways and in ways that are much more personal. (More on this in Parts 9 and 10). But to me there seems to be an underwhelming amount of evidence that would support the idea of tithing (giving a tenth) as a principle in the lives of believers.
Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
The word "tithe" means "one-tenth." A common question that I've heard all throughout my Christian life is, "Should Christians tithe off of their gross income or net income?" Please excuse my incredulity, but come on! - The whole basis of the question is misguided, at best. It assumes that "tithing" is for Christians, and that it has to do with money. Let's begin, through the scriptures, to put those ideas to death. I do want to point out as we get into this that I am differentiating between "giving" and "tithing." "Giving" is part of the Christian's new nature, and is done through grace - just like the rest of the Christian life. Unlike the 10% tithe, "giving" has nothing to do with a set amount or a legally prescribed amount, but rather has much more to do with a cheerful heart that truly desires to give. Christian giving is by no means limited to money, but may involve the giving of possessions, time, talents, services and other resources (we'll get into this later on in the series.) Tithing, however, is a completely different story.
More Than One Tithe
It may come as a surprise to many people that Malachi 3 is really only a small portion of the scriptures that talk about tithing. Did you know that? Judging by all the tithing teachings that I've heard in my life, you'd think that Malachi 3 was "IT" when it comes to the teaching of tithing.
Notice the Malachi passage says "bring all the tithes (plural) into the storehouse." What tithes? And what storehouse? It seems the modern church is ignorant about all this (doesn't really have a clue what this really means) - and in fact has, in its ignorance, turned the Malachi passage into something that it is not. However, Israel - the actual people to whom the laws were given - knew exactly what was meant. Under the system of law that they lived in, many instructions had been given regarding various tithes, and each tithe had various purposes. As we go through them, take note as to whether or not any of them had to do with income or paychecks - or money in any way. Also take note as to the frequency of each tithe (weekly? monthly? yearly? every three years? etc). And take note as to where the tithes were taken to, and how they were distributed and used. And finally, take note as to whether the people had a free choice on whether to tithe or not. (In other words, could they decide in their hearts to give cheerfully, or did they have to give).
Abraham's Tithe
The first mention of a "tithe" in the Bible is in Genesis 14. I'll summarize the story, but make sure you read the story for yourself. It's a quick and easy read. In short, a handful of kings had gone to war against another handful of kings. During a battle, Abraham's nephew, Lot, was captured, along with his family and goods. So Abram planned and executed an attack, and was able to bring back Lot and his family, and all of the goods that had been taken. Then Melchizedek king of Salem blessed Abraham, and Abraham "gave him a tithe of all." (Update: Does "all" mean that Abraham gave a tithe of everything he owned? I wrote this blog post on that subject.)
I don't know how many times I've heard this story used to teach the "principle" of tithing. I've heard it said that it was through "Abraham, the father of our faith," that the principle of tithing was introduced, and so we can follow Abraham's actions as an example of the principle of tithing since we're his children by faith. Well, remember - Abraham's tithe was a one-time tithe. It wasn't something Abraham continued to do, nor did it have anything to do with his salary or employment earnings or wealth. After fighting in a battle and winning back the goods and people that had been taken, he took the spoils of war and offered a tenth of it to Melchizedek. It's that simple.
(Update: Some historians note that it was either a law or custom in that part of the world at that time to give a tithe of the spoils of war to the local king or priest. That is to say, Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek - "king of Salem, priest of the Most High God" - Heb 7:1 - had nothing to do with him having a generous or a giving heart. He was following the local law or custom.)
Tithing Not a "Type" for New Covenant Giving
This one-time tithe of Abraham was never meant to be used to promote or teach a principle of tithing or giving in the New Covenant church. That idea is made up. In fact the writer of Hebrews gleans something out of this story that does have to do with the New Covenant, but it has absolutely nothing to do with Christian giving. You perhaps know that many things in the Old Covenant are "types and shadows" of the "substance" of the New Covenant. It seems that Old Covenant "tithing" and the Old Covenant "storehouse" are reckoned by many as a type and shadow of Christians giving money to a church. But nothing could be further from the truth.
In the book of Hebrews we find Abraham's tithe brought up as part of the writer's explanation of something else... something that has nothing at all to do with tithing. In Chapter 7, Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek is used to show that there was a need for something greater than the Levitical priesthood, which turns out to be the priesthood and sacrifice of Jesus. It says, "Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him." If you read all of Hebrews 7, you'll see that the whole point of Abraham's tithe being brought up has nothing to do with Christians following some principle of tithing, but it has everything to do with showing how Jesus is superior to the Levitical priesthood. More on this in Part 7. The point here is that Abraham's tithe is not used in the New Testament as an example of Christian giving.
Abraham's tithe was not given out of sacrifice or obligation. It wasn't given as a gesture of his good heart, or a heart of faith. It wasn't given as a result of being "convicted" by a sermon on "giving." It wasn't given to a local church or congregation of people of faith. It wasn't given to help a cause. It wasn't given to pay a salary to Melchizedek or his "staff," nor to pay for building costs or church programs. It also had nothing to do with a principle of sowing so that he could reap. Anyone who teaches you any of these things is making it up. Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek was simply a one-time offering from the spoils of war. Let's please take it for what it was, and not make it into something that it wasn't.
Jacob's Voluntary Tithe
In Genesis 28:22, Jacob said to God, "of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to you." This was a voluntary vow to give God a tenth, and it was a conditional vow, starting with the "if" in Gen 28:20. Also, Jacob said this of himself. All of the rest of the people didn't make this same pledge. I don't know of any other examples of the voluntary giving of a tenth. There could be more but I don't know of any. (If you know of any, please let me know). The thing I want to point out is that there is hardly enough evidence, in my opinion, to conclude - or even to merely suggest - that tithing (giving a tenth) was ever meant to be a normal part of the lives of people of faith. It's conjecture at best, with a stark absence of other examples of voluntary tithing in the lives of the Old Testament saints.
We do see plenty of examples of giving all throughout the Bible! Giving is done by all sorts of people in all sorts of ways and in all sorts of sizes and amounts. Giving is done in corporate ways and in ways that are much more personal. (More on this in Parts 9 and 10). But to me there seems to be an underwhelming amount of evidence that would support the idea of tithing (giving a tenth) as a principle in the lives of believers.
Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)