The Crux of the Pro-tithe Argument

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by TakingDominion

Regarding traveling evangelists or itinerant preachers as you called them. Unfortunately, in today's world it is impossible do what they relying soley on donations of food and clothing. My Duramax doesn't run on french fry grease. Although, I wish it did.

If you had read more closely, I also wrote of "sending them on their way", which is the Scriptural concept of paying traveling expenses.

See e.g., Acts 15:3, Acts 21:5, Romans 15:24, 2 Corinthians 1:16.

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by loran adkins

So you don't think that to say if you don't do this you are going to hell and you are in rebelling to the pastor, is being compulsory?

I wouldn’t say that. Do I agree with that approach, no I don’t. I believe the Pastor that says this, believes it whole heartily. With that said the saints that are in the church(s) that’s I’ve seen are fine with giving tithe. That’s what I’m saying, there is no reason to believe a Pastor or any other member of the ministry is forcing anyone to pay a 10% tithe, if saints are willing to support with that amount.

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by coksiw

We keep discussing this topic, and people keep hardening their heart, but there is only one truth. I don't know how some can teach tithing as an obedience issue for the church when it is obviously not there.

Teaching the Word of God is not a game, there are implications to the teacher.

[2Ti 2:15 NKJV] Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Thats why we discuss. There’s a good chance not many of us will move on our belief. Maybe down the road somebody reads these threads and gain a revelation.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by TakingDominion

Also you left out all these verses about paying the preacher...

Not addressing every possible verse on a subject does not equal leaving them out of the discussion.

1 Timothy 5:17-18 ESV /
Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.”

First, you must realize there is no agreement about the "double honor" and it being anything to do with a financial stipend from the church. Secondly, in regards to the quotes from the OT, anyone can see immediately that this is talking about food, not money.

Whenever I went house to house teaching the Word, if the hosts wanted to feed me, I ate most hardily, without reservation.

Galatians 6:6 ESV /
One who is taught the word must share all good things with the one who teaches.

You have to read money into this. All good things can mean a lot of different things, but wages in the form money is not specified, either way.

1 Corinthians 9:14 ESV /
In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel.

1 Corinthians 9:9-14 ESV
For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.” Is it for oxen that God is concerned? Does he not speak entirely for our sake? It was written for our sake, because the plowman should plow in hope and the thresher thresh in hope of sharing in the crop. If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? If others share this rightful claim on you, do not we even more? Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ. Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple service get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in the sacrificial offerings? ...

Again, the comparison is to food. The Levites and priests were fed from portions of the animal and grain offerings that were offered up at the altar. No one tossed money into the fire.

Otherwise, the material benefits Paul speaks of, besides food, is likely clothing and a place to stay and travel expenses, as already shown by and through other verses of Scripture penned by Paul.

Acts 20:33-35 ESV /
I coveted no one's silver or gold or apparel. You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me. In all things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”

Paul wanted no one's money! Paul worked with his own hands to supply his financial need. These verses prove the point most splendidly. Paul left the elders/pastors of Ephesus the right example of working hard in order to help the weak. Basically, Paul told these ministers to work secular employment and use the wages they receive to give to others who cannot work, or are slaves (i.e. the weak) and be a blessing to them.

2 Thessalonians 3:7-10 ESV
For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you. It was not because we do not have that right, but to give you in ourselves an example to imitate. For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.

Again, this proves the point. Work hard during the day and then minister at night. You seem to have advocated for something completely different. So, if a pastor is not willing to work at secular employment, Paul's instruction is pretty clear: they have no right to eat with the church.

Luke 10:7 ESV /
And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house.

Again, what are the wages? Jesus makes it clear it is food and a place to stay, along with traveling expenses. It's never an income to build up a bank account for a home and a car and a vacation fund and money to send the kids to a private Christian school, or whatever.

1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 ESV /
We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves.

You can and should do all of this, no money involved. Money involvement actually hinders this verse, because sometimes the giving of money can lead to bribery or a sense of entitlement, or the idea that all you have to do is cut a check and you're okay with the Lord, or competition between laborers, and etc. Money can seriously interfere with correctly honoring those who labor in the church.

Romans 4:4 ESV /
Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due.

This is a metaphor for salvation by works of the law versus grace. Has nothing to do with providing a wage-based income to a minister in the church so he doesn't have to work in secular employment.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by TakingDominion

You say the tithe should be going to help the poor or buy school supplies for kids.. I'm not against any of that, but tell me, where in scripture does it indicate that is what we should be doing with the tithe?

It's funny that you want to say there's no scripture for the tithe to go to the pastor, but then when asked what should be done with the tithe, you give an entirely unscriptural answer. I have one for you..

Numbers 18:24 ESV /
For the tithe of the people of Israel, which they present as a contribution to the Lord, I have given to the Levites for an inheritance. Therefore I have said of them that they shall have no inheritance among the people of Israel.”

I never said the "tithe" should go anywhere. I never wrote the word tithe until now. You asked if a church was financially able to, couldn't they pay a minister a wage, and I said if the church had the money available to do so, they should use it elsewhere. No mention of tithes. You read that into my discourse.

No one tithes in my church, yet we have the means to give away thousands of dollars every year to various needs as they arise. A coworker of mine from a couple of years ago when I was an optometrist in the Walmart Vision Center was in an auto accident and broke both of her legs and was disabled for almost a year and we gave over $7,000.00 for her and her family without so much as a fund-raiser or a call to give. We had the money and so, we cut the check. Now, imagine if that money was in a pastor's bank account? Would he give it up so this lost soul wouldn't lose her house?

That's the conflict of interest underlying this entire discussion. It IS more blessed to give than to receive, unless the giving interferes with the pastor's paycheck??? While I am not trying to indict every pastor for all time in every place, there are plenty who have threatened to quit and give up on the church if they didn't get paid. The love of money is the root of all evil, after all.

Food, clothing, temporary shelter while traveling, and traveling expenses are all that the Scriptures clearly allow for, and only for itinerant apostles and evangelists. All else is speculation, or not clearly spelled out. But that's not how most churches operate. They pay a wage to a pastor and he uses it for his mortgage, his car payment, medical bills, his family needs, and etc. There is no allowance for this in the teachings of the Apostles.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Only if you understand that TITHE does not go hand in hand with all the laws about it in the old covenant. But Paul simply stated that the general manner of ministers living of the gospel was the same as priests living of the altar. It's the general aspect, not the split hairs of exactly how that's done. The New Testament does not get into anything more than ministers being able to be supported by offerings from the believers. That's what it meant by not muzzling the ox while he treads the corn.

It is incredibly naive to think that the word tithe can be divorced from the OT law and canon. No one would even have the word drilled into their heads and come up with the idea of giving ten percent of their yearly income if it wasn't for the laws concerning the tithe in the OT. Two references in Genesis wouldn't make the difference. People tithe because of the law. It's plain and simple, even if in your own mind you separate the two, the vast majority do not. This thread is proof. Malachi 3 has already been referenced, and it always is, to terrify saints into making sure they tithe so they don't go to hell as a thief and robber of God. And Malachi, in referencing tithes, is referencing the Torah laws and commandments of the tithe.

So no, I don't think you should try to convince everyone that the word tithe has nothing to do with the law, because even the word itself is part of the church vernacular because of the law. If tithing wasn't a part of the law, not a soul would speak of it.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by mfblume

What about 1 Cor 9?

1 Corinthians 9:4-15.. Have we not power to eat and to drink? ..(5).. Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? ..(6).. Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working? ..(7).. Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?

Above Paul said that people are supported in the ministry just as the one who feeds the flock can live from the milk involved in his work. Who goes to war at his own out of pocket expense?


..(8).. Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? ..(9).. For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?


He said that an ox ate of the very same corn he tread while he worked. The ox did not go to other sources of food other than the food that was provided to him where he tread.


..(10).. Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. ..(11).. If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

Reaping carnal things is whatever it takes to live provided by the people to whom he ministered.


..(12).. If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.

This is the reason Paul said he did not take incomce in money or food or whatever from the churches as your references above indicate. It was not because he should not do it. It was because he did not want the touchy people to accuse him of anything, when he had the full right to take support from them.

In other words, he said believers should support ministers, but he abrogated that RIGHT when he di not have to.


..(13).. Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? ..(14).. Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. ..(15).. But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.

Again he said it was his right to be supported by the people only he exempted himself. ANd we cannot turn around and say that we should follow Pual and God expects us to follow Paul and exempt ourselves of that right when the whole point in this chapter is that it is a right to be supported.

Again, read that chapter. It's a RIGHT. ANd Paul merely stepped away from that right and he would not have said it was a right if he meant no one should NOT exempt themselves.

1 Corinthians 9 is about itinerant apostles who go about evangelizing as church planters. Paul makes it clear in verse 1.

AM I NOT AN APOSTLE? AM I NOT FREE? HAVE I NOT SEEN JESUS CHRIST [see Acts 1:21-22] OUR LORD? ARE YE NOT MY WORK IN THE LORD?

[Tithesmeister]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

It is incredibly naive to think that the word tithe can be divorced from the OT law and canon. No one would even have the word drilled into their heads and come up with the idea of giving ten percent of their yearly income if it wasn't for the laws concerning the tithe in the OT. Two references in Genesis wouldn't make the difference. People tithe because of the law. It's plain and simple, even if in your own mind you separate the two, the vast majority do not. This thread is proof. Malachi 3 has already been referenced, and it always is, to terrify saints into making sure they tithe so they don't go to hell as a thief and robber of God. And Malachi, in referencing tithes, is referencing the Torah laws and commandments of the tithe.

So no, I don't think you should try to convince everyone that the word tithe has nothing to do with the law, because even the word itself is part of the church vernacular because of the law. If tithing wasn't a part of the law, not a soul would speak of it.

Would it offend anyone, if I said amen? And maybe waved my hanky?

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

A good job of rightly dividing the word of truth. He establishes the truth that Apostles do have the God given right to receive offerings.
He also establishes the truth that he would rather die than seem to be abusing this right and rejoices he can preach the gospel for free!

Meanwhile over in Acts 20 he charges the Pastors/Elders to work with their own hands.

While mixing in the truth from Galatians 6 and 1 Timothy 5 that the saints have a duty and responsibility to give to the ministry.

Preaching this gospel isn’t free, I’m not micromanaging your post (please don’t get that feeling). I like what D.C. Moody once said in a message I heard, “a young man came up to him and said, Elder, i want to preach like you.... he then told this young man, you seen one hour, what about the 23 hours of what you didnt see!”

Look at this,

Matthew 4:18-20
And Jesus, walking by the sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishers. [19] And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men. [20] And they straightway left their nets, and followed him.

I dont read anywhere where Peter, James, and John picked up their nets as a career again after the Lord called them. When Jesus sent them out by 2, the people who they were ministering where to support them! I dont read where they went to the sea and starting catching fish to supply there evangelism trip. It went as far as Jesus telling them that those that do not receive you, let your peace return to you. Study what that meaneth....

Accepting a call of God is a walk of faith. If a minister is starting a work, then he may need to work a little. My belief is only to supply his monthly need. If that take 20 hours then have the rest of the time to minister. Because a minister doesn’t work at a physical job, that doesn’t mean he is lazy! Friend, the spiritual side of working is work unlike Ive ever done physically. The mind of a minister must be continually on the Lord, its a discipline of the mind to be ready whenever the Lord is calling.

Paul was an apostle, he started churchs throughout the region, that call is different in itself. Paul was mightily used of God, not because of his tent making skills, yet his dedication, and disciplined lifestyle for God to work with him.

Is your current lifestyle ...

Working around God?

Or God working around You?

The minister especially has to be available all the time. Not bound by a 40+ hr work schedule. What if God tells you to available this week, not to do any work, pray, fast, stay home and allow his spirit to minister to you? Would your boss be ok with that?

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by Tithesmeister

Would it offend anyone, if I said amen? And maybe waved my hanky?

As in defeat?