Passing on the Plate: Why Your Congregation May not be Tithing

People who don't tithe are under the misconception or misunderstanding that their money is theirs. Everything we have is God's we are His stewards. Jesus took time to point out the widow and her mites. We do not know the results or her giving and we are never told that she would prosper on earth because of her faithfulness. Jesus simply pointed her out as an example to be recorded in the Gospels for all of us to learn from her example. She gave more that 10% before taxes.

I am curious about those who do tithe; do you believe that tithing is restricted to giving to your local church? Can you tithe to your local Christian School or a Faith-Based Pro-Life clinic or maybe a homeless shelter?

Is tithing a current doctrine?
I am not sure.

What are Christians known for?

Love John 13:35
"By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."

Would a person that does not give, is able and there is a need, a person of love?

No.

1 John 3:17,18 NASB
"But whoever has the world's goods, and sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him?
Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth."

I think people are missing the point. It is not if there is a doctrine, but if there is a need.

Freedom allows life. Legalism quenches spiritual life.

Jesus amplified the 10 commandments. It is not murder but hate that is now restricted. Before adultery was banned now lust is banned.

Jesus is not asking for 10% but 100%.
Luke 14:33"So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions. NASB

Lord give me your life to help others.

I too was confused about this issue.I have come to the following understanding.Tithing is under the Law,as is circumsion of the flesh,keeping the Sabbath,and marking the Feast Days.No where does it mention tithing in the New Testament with the one exception of the mention of it by our Lord,and His mention of it seemed to imply that if you believe that you are saved by the Law, than we better keep all of it.Tithing is not one of the requirements layed down by the leaders of the early church for gentile converts to Christianity.Why is tithing the only act of the law which we have imposed upon the New Testament church?Would Paul call us on the carpet for chaining ourselves to this legal observation as he did the Galatians for their backsliding into physical circumsion?I think if we honestly take a long prayful look at all of the opulent Palacial santuaries,and the grossly affluent clergy which these tithes support we know why it is a frequently preached sermon.Reminds me of Indulgences.

Great article, and I'm sure it could create some spirited discussion at Bible Study! I grew up in a church that preached that if you didn't tithe you were placing yourself under a curse, based on Malachi. It had to be 10% before taxes and rounded up. I believe many churches may cut themselves short with thier wealthier attendees since they feel justified meeting the requirements of "the law".

Generosity is important...more important than the number or percentage. Each person should agree in his heart what to give, in proportion to his/her income. For some it could be less than (gasp!) 10%; and for some it may be more (gasp, gasp) than 10%. May God help you determine what you can and should do!

Every time I hear this debate I wonder: how many of those who believe the tithe isn't for today give less than 10% of their income to the Lord? Perhaps I'm cynical, but I have the sense that their conclusions about tithing are basically an excuse to give less.

I believe the body of Christ should be generous givers as the scripture tells us to be. I do not believe that giving 10 percent is for the church today.
And I also believe that we should give joyfully and not because we are told to give in order to be blessed. We should never give our money for the soul purpose of getting something back. We should give out of the love of our hearts. And it is O.K. to give to those who are in need in the body of Christ.
We are to help the poor amongst us, for this pleases our Heavenly Father.

First, the temple was served by people who were not to work outside the temple so they could keep clean when they stood before God, otherwise they would be struck dead by God. So the people tithed livestock and food because that was the main source of thier lifestyle, and the priests needed food to live also, not money. We live in a culture where we don't know where our food comes from, the store? In their times there wasn't X-box or TV or digital music or automatic deposit, just food, livestock, clothing, acoustic music, and yes some money. They bartered with labor, and livestock, so for them to think of life in terms of earning an income to go to the store to buy livestock and food was rediculous.
Second, the new testament said that believers gave to all who were in need, not 10%. Jesus said, render unto ceaser what is ceaser's and render unto God what is God's. If you recall, annanias and saphira wers struck dead because they claimed to give 10% but did not.

To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge." Nicolaus Copernicus

I have read Kelly's book, and this article does not get fully to the heart of his argument. he points out that the tithe did not involve money, but products which could be grown - crops and livestock. As a result, Kelly argues that only certain paople could tithe, namely those who produced crops and/or livestock.

Thus, the very idea of money being connected to tithing is refuted by Kelly. In addition, the general point of view regarding tithing assumes what needs to be proven, that there is a Christian collorary to the Temple storehouse. Nothing in Acts or any of the epistles substantiates such a conclusion.

If people wish to give, the NT argues that giving is based upon loving Christ and loving one another. Christ gave because we needed what He had to give - His blood. We should give because the recipients heed what we have to give - food, finances, or other resources. Just as Christ loved us to the point of giving His blood, we love others, especially other Christians.

We argue endlessly about these matters without any constructive result. Jesus is my Lord, my High Priest, my Teacher and Comforter by His Holy Spirit. He has settled my account forever, paid in full and has set me free from all who would step between me and God. Jesus in effect abolished a priestly class and anyone who attempts to dictate a set of rules for my relationship with Him is wrong. If you feel the Lord leads you to a strict 10% tithe then by all means obey the Spirits leading. If your heart feels otherwise then follow your leading. Do all as unto the Lord. Try ALL the spirits, no matter who is talking or how exalted they may seem. I am FREE, and restrictions and rules about giving, eating, drinking,holidays,the sabbath,clothes etc are between me and my Saviour! There is a spirit among us all that feels it must dictate to others and Jesus set us free from that. Work out your own salvation in fear and trembling and be careful not to destroy your brother with your freedom....

We ask for the Spirit of God to rise up a Pastor. We ask the Spirit of God to rise up a ministry or a program. We ask the Spirit of God to call more missionaries. We ask the Spirit of God to train our children. We ask the Spirit of God to grow a new Church. We ask the Spirit of God to help us in our devotions and prayer. We ask the Spirit of God to lead us when we witness. We ask the Spirit of God to guide Everything, except our pocket books. . . We'll just play that safe and leave that up to tithing. . . Does this make sense?

While I want to first thank Crosswalk for at least printing a viewpoint opposing tithing, I wish they would have interviewed me personally and also attempt to monitor an extended two-way dialog on the subject. However from experience I can almost promise that those who support NT tithing will not engage in a real discussion.

Andrew Hill of Wheaton is on both sides of the issue --- admit it is not a defensible doctrine and then teach it. He is also going contrary to his school’s dispensational theology and that of the esteemed Walter Elwell. He begins by correctly stating "It is true that there really is no carry-over stipulation in the New Testament to give a tithe,” says Hill. “Ten percent seems to be an assumption rather than a given imperative.”
Hill then reverses himself while offering no Bible texts: “He personally thinks the 10 percent mandate from the Old Testament should be a minimum carry over from the old covenant to the new. “It’s a baseline, a suggested idea for proport