The Crux of the Pro-tithe Argument

[Originalist]

Interestingly, the main crux of the pro-tithers' position is the fact that the practice is "MENTIONED" prior to the Law. Naturally, many will point out that animal sacrifices and circumcision were also mentioned before the Law. Thus, it would seem that, in order to be consistent, the pro-tithers would consider those practices to also be binding on the New Testament church. Ah, but they have cleverly (well, at least in their own eyes) found a way around that seeming contradictory obstacle. They simply attach tithing to the "moral code" that pre-existed before Law. If tithing is part of the moral code that pre-existed before the Law, then it certainly outlasts the abolishment of the Law. Certainly, we would not claim that the abolishment of the old covenant constitutes an abolishing of God's command to live holy and not commit murder, steal, lie, cheat, commit adultery, etc. So, to the pro-tither, saying that tithing was abolished is like saying God's laws against the sins listed above are also abolished.

Pretty clever, huh? I mean, if tithing did pre-date the Law as one of the moral imperatives that were incorporated into the Law, then the practice would be binding on the whole human race for all time. But there is just one tiny little problem with this theory. While nobody disputes the fact that tithing was practised in some areas and to some degree before the Law, the pro-tithers simply have not produced data that validates their claim that the tithe pre-existed as a moral imperative, or as part of God's eternal moral code. So, I invite them to do so now. Please make your case that tithing is a moral imperative, or part of the moral code that pre-dated the Law. Before the flood, and before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, God made his moral imperatives clear. Where do we find God, prior to the Law, making tithing a moral imperative? This narrows the focus of the debate and prevents us all from chasing rabbits.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Interestingly, the main crux of the pro-tithers' position is the fact that the practice is "MENTIONED" prior to the Law. Naturally, many will point out that animal sacrifices and circumcision were also mentioned before the Law. Thus, it would seem that, in order to be consistent, the pro-tithers would consider those practices to also be binding on the New Testament church. Ah, but they have cleverly (well, at least in their own eyes) found a way around that seeming contradictory obstacle. They simply attach tithing to the "moral code" that pre-existed before Law. If tithing is part of the moral code that pre-existed before the Law, then it certainly outlasts the abolishment of the Law. Certainly, we would not claim that the abolishment of the old covenant constitutes an abolishing of God's command to live holy and not commit murder, steal, lie, cheat, commit adultery, etc. So, to the pro-tither, saying that tithing was abolished is like saying God's laws against the sins listed above are also abolished.

Pretty clever, huh? I mean, if tithing did pre-date the Law as one of the moral imperatives that were incorporated into the Law, then the practice would be binding on the whole human race for all time. But there is just one tiny little problem with this theory. While nobody disputes the fact that tithing was practised in some areas and to some degree before the Law, the pro-tithers simply have not produced data that validates their claim that the tithe pre-existed as a moral imperative, or as part of God's eternal moral code. So, I invite them to do so now. Please make your case that tithing is a moral imperative, or part of the moral code that pre-dated the Law. Before the flood, and before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, God made his moral imperatives clear. Where do we find God, prior to the Law, making tithing a moral imperative? This narrows the focus of the debate and prevents us all from chasing rabbits.

I’m sorry. I just can’t support it with scripture. You win!

[mfblume]

You guys still hung up on giving monetary offerings?

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by mfblume

You guys still hung up on giving monetary offerings?

Who are you guys? If you want to debate offerings, which were sometimes rendered in money, and tithes, which never were, and base that debate on real scripture? I’d be happy to participate in that debate.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Who are you guys? If you want to debate offerings, which were sometimes rendered in money, and tithes, which never were, and base that debate on real scripture? I’d be happy to participate in that debate.

Giving does not have to be distinguished between money or items. Giving is giving no matter what it is, and tithes or no tithes are not even affected by that distinction.

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Giving does not have to be distinguished between money or items. Giving is giving no matter what it is, and tithes or no tithes are not even affected by that distinction.

Tithes are affected, according to God. Be careful that you don’t teach false doctrine.

Actually giving was distinguished by God, in the scripture. They were not allowed to tithe whatever they decided was convenient. That was decided for them . . .
By God.

You are ignoring the scriptural fact that tithing was giving that was prescribed by God to be done a certain way and was relegated to certain specific use by certain specific people. Whereas offerings were allowed to be given of things that tithes were not.

Money being such a thing.

If you feel strongly about it. I’ll be happy to debate you with scripture. I doubt you’ll take advantage of the offer, because you are much to knowledgeable of scripture to hope to win such a debate.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Interestingly, the main crux of the pro-tithers' position is the fact that the practice is "MENTIONED" prior to the Law. Naturally, many will point out that animal sacrifices and circumcision were also mentioned before the Law. Thus, it would seem that, in order to be consistent, the pro-tithers would consider those practices to also be binding on the New Testament church. Ah, but they have cleverly (well, at least in their own eyes) found a way around that seeming contradictory obstacle. They simply attach tithing to the "moral code" that pre-existed before Law. If tithing is part of the moral code that pre-existed before the Law, then it certainly outlasts the abolishment of the Law. Certainly, we would not claim that the abolishment of the old covenant constitutes an abolishing of God's command to live holy and not commit murder, steal, lie, cheat, commit adultery, etc. So, to the pro-tither, saying that tithing was abolished is like saying God's laws against the sins listed above are also abolished.

Pretty clever, huh? I mean, if tithing did pre-date the Law as one of the moral imperatives that were incorporated into the Law, then the practice would be binding on the whole human race for all time. But there is just one tiny little problem with this theory. While nobody disputes the fact that tithing was practised in some areas and to some degree before the Law, the pro-tithers simply have not produced data that validates their claim that the tithe pre-existed as a moral imperative, or as part of God's eternal moral code. So, I invite them to do so now. Please make your case that tithing is a moral imperative, or part of the moral code that pre-dated the Law. Before the flood, and before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, God made his moral imperatives clear. Where do we find God, prior to the Law, making tithing a moral imperative? This narrows the focus of the debate and prevents us all from chasing rabbits.

Why wasn't religious tithing exclusively to Hebrew/Israelites? The whole predating the law shows pagans tithing. Something they always did, most ancient religions tithed to their priestcraft. Circumcision was practiced by the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Phoenicians, and Syrians. Was a right of passage for all males. There was a time when Christians were adamant against circumcision. Not anymore, but funny how you have many passages of scripture telling the Christain not to circumcise their children going mostly unheeded but tithing? Whoo hoo, that's the candy stick!

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Why wasn't religious tithing exclusively to Hebrew/Israelites? The whole predating the law shows pagans tithing. Something they always did, most ancient religions tithed to their priestcraft. Circumcision was practiced by the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Phoenicians, and Syrians. Was a right of passage for all males. There was a time when Christians were adamant against circumcision. Not anymore, but funny how you have many passages of scripture telling the Christain not to circumcise their children going mostly unheeded but tithing? Whoo hoo, that's the candy stick!

I am not questioning that tithing was practised prior to the Law. My original post is self-explanatory. Two pages worth of posts and not one person as even attempted to answer the question I posed. I find that to be rude.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Originalist

I am not questioning that tithing was practised prior to the Law. My original post is self-explanatory. Two pages worth of posts and not one person as even attempted to answer the question I posed. I find that to be rude.

I'm not trying to be rude, but what I'm asking is why was tithing a well maintained practice is the ancient world. Even prior to Abraham?

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

I'm not trying to be rude, but what I'm asking is why was tithing a well maintained practice is the ancient world. Even prior to Abraham?

Could you please show references of tithing of wages from those pagans? Also, if you use history, I would think you would use it to confirm a development of a false teaching or to set the context for something from the scripture.

The tithing in the new testament is as weak as the baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Even if the ancient societies tithed to their priests, well, we are not pagans, and we are all priests in the Lord. Would that make us all qualified to receive tithing according to your pagan reference to support tithing?

I am thankful that the Bible speaks by itself, and more and more people are realizing tithing of wages, taught as an obedience to God issue, is a fraud, to the point that WSJ published an article about the situation no long ago.