The Lord's Portion: the Tithe (2 of 2)

V. Abraham’s Tithe: a freewill gift and tribute to the Lord.

A. In ancient antiquity it was common practice to give 10% after wars to deities or kings. Abraham was just following the local customs of the day. The remaining 90% Abraham gave back to the king of Sodom. It is also important to consider the fact here that Abraham did not tithe of his own possessions. Abraham gave 10% of the spoils of war of another’s belongings to God, and the remainder he gave back to the ungodly king of Sodom. Now let’s all match that one! Let’s all give to God what doesn’t belong to us, and then give the remainder back to the one to whom it all originally belonged!

Professor Sayce in his Patriarchal Religion, succinctly notes here:

This offering of tithes was no new thing. In his Babylonian home Abram must have been familiar with the practice. The cuneiform inscriptions of Babylonia contain frequent references to it. It went back to the pre-Semitic age of Chaldea, and the great temples of Babylonia were largely supported by the esra or tithe which was levied upon prince and peasant alike. That the god should receive a tenth of the good things which, it was believed, he had bestowed upon mankind was not considered to be asking too much. There are many tablets in the British Museum which are receipts for the payment of the tithe to the great temple of the sun-god at Sippara, in the time of Nebuchadnezzar and his successors. From one of them we learn that Belshazzar, even at the very moment when the Babylonian empire was falling from his father's hands, nevertheless found an opportunity for paying the tithe due from his sister (p. 175).

B. Of all the things that Abraham did---circumcision, burnt offerings, and even giving a tenth---only circumcision was clearly "commanded" of him by God. Everything else he was free to do as he pleased from his heart. And yet all were later to become laws (except tithing from the spoils of war), and all such laws were later abolished and cancelled at the cross. As went one, so went them all. As said earlier, it has to be all or nothing. And even the fact that Abraham’s tithe from the spoils of war was forbidden under Mosaic Law should give one pause to think with great concern as to where it is that we get the idea that we should do what Israel did, let alone even what Abraham did which was not even allowed under Mosaic Law. Clearly, we have become a law unto ourselves to teach and practice anything otherwise. If you thought the scribes and Pharisees were the only ones who taught for the doctrines of God, the teachings and commandments of men, you’ve got another thing coming! It’s right before us at the very doorsteps as one first walks into a church!

C. Some More Thoughts on “Plunder,” or “Spoils of War”:

1. Contrary to popular opinion, "plunder" was never to be tithed from to the Lord under the Law of Moses. An entire chapter in Deuteronomy is devoted to plunder or “spoils of war,” and it was given entirely to the people as wages for going to war (Deut. 20; see also Ezk. 29:19). Only the cities that God gave them as an inheritance could they not plunder from (v. 16); and Jericho was one of those cities in Josh. 6:17. Otherwise, everything else was fair game for them to take for themselves. And it is significant to note here that they were not commanded to tithe from this. The laws concerning the tithe specified what was to be tithed from; it was the grain, new wine, oil, and livestock that the people cultivated and bred. Again, portions from the spoils of war were NOT commanded to be tithed from.
2. An exception to this law on the spoils of war is seen in an incident where in one of the towns that the Lord had given to Israel as an inheritance (where they started to follow after other gods), they were to slay all the people and livestock in that town, gather all the plunder, and burn it in the public square as a burnt offering to the Lord (Deut. 13:12-18).
3. Another exception to the laws on the spoils of war in Deut. 20, is in Num. 31. Here in Numbers 31 God required a portion (but not 10%) of the plunder of the Midianites to go to Eleazar the priest (1% from all of the soldier's plunder), and to the Levites (2% from the people’s plunder). The gold, silver and the rest of the booty God did not require of them to give. But the commanders of the soldiers freely gave a freewill offering of just the gold as a “gift” to the Lord for the success that the Lord had given to them in the battle, and for the Lord seeing to it that none of the men lost their lives in battles (v. 52).
4. In ISam. 30:26, David also gave as a “gift” some of the plunder to “elders” in various cities. But he did not tithe from this plunder or give any to the Lord, because as the Law noted in Deut. 20, it was the people’s to give and do with as they freely chose to do. I cannot stress the importance of this, that the tithe was NOT required to be given from the spoils of war! So where do we come off in saying to others that we must likewise do what Abraham did? God didn’t even require such a thing under the Mosaic Law.
5. In 1Chr. 26:27, the people freely took “some of the plunder taken in battle [and] they dedicated [it] for the repair of the temple of the Lord.”
6. Some other incidents where the plunder was entirely the possession of all the people, is in: Josh. 8:2; 11:14; 22:8; Deut. 2:35; 3:7.
7. In Esther 9:10, 14b, 16b they freely chose not to take the plunder that was rightfully theirs to take according to Deut. 20. Wow, now there’s an example of not having hearts of greed! All they cared about was their lives being spared, not possessions.

D. Now with regards to literal circumcision, Paul was unambiguously clear that literal circumcision is no longer binding upon the Christian, and to this no one would disagree. And notice also that even though it was instituted as a command before the Law, Paul includes it with the Law as having been abrogated at the cross (Rom. 2:25-27; Gal. 5:3; Eph. 2:15, 16; Col. 2:14- 16; Lev. 12:3). When the written code was canceled, this canceled (along with many other things) circumcision, the Levitical priesthood and the tithe which supported them as well. Even orthodox Jews today don't pay tithes to their Rabbis, because there are no longer any recognizable Levites as priests to tithe to. Even they understand that no Levites means no paying of tithes. And as the author of Hebrews declares of the former priesthood and the tithes which were associated with them: "The former regulation is set aside because it is weak and useless" (Heb. 7:8). And just earlier he had said with regards to these priests of Levi under the Law: "those descendants of Levi who receive the priestly office have a commandment in the law to take tithes from the people, that is, from their brothers, though these also are descended from Abraham. But this man [Melchizedek], who does not have his descent from them [or from Levi], received tithes [not by way of a commandment] from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises" (Heb. 7:5-6, ESV). The ellipses of the word "commandment" with regards to Melchizedek receiving a tithe, in contrast to the clear and poignant statement that the Levites "have a commandment in the law to take tithes," is striking. The author of Hebrews clearly states with no mincing of words that only the Levites were "commanded" by God to take tithes from the people. No one else received such a "commandment"; and this includes even Christ who was of the tribe of Judah, as well as the majority of His Jewish disciples. They would have been going against the Law of Moses if they had exacted a tithe from the people, proving beyond all doubt that no such "commandment" would have been enforced upon their followers. For them to do so, they would have been adding something to God's law that He had not prescribed of them to do. But as we will soon see in just a moment, people in many ways supported Christ and His apostles, but they were not supported by a tithe. Again, they had no "command" from God to "take" tithes from the people, as the Levites were clearly "commanded" of God to do. Tithing to Levites in the OT wasn't to set a precedent for future giving in the Church. Like all the sacrifices and offerings in the OT (and even the priesthood), the tithe that was given to the high priest (or Christ) and to his priests (or us) was a type that was to show how God has a "portion," "allotment," and an "inheritance" of people in the world who belong strictly to Him and to His people. As Paul says in Romans 15:16, as "a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, He gave me the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles [as well] might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit." And we shall all come before Him rejoicing, while bringing in His sheaves.

And finally, how can Abraham’s tithe "of the spoils of war," which (like circumcision) was also before the law and thought naively (by not a few no less) to be included in the law, be any different than circumcision which was entirely abrogated at the cross? For if “Abraham’s everlasting covenant” of circumcision (see Gen. 17:9-14) is canceled (naturally speaking), how then can the much weaker precedent of “Abraham’s tithe” which was not commanded of him like circumcision, and which was also denoted as an “everlasting ordinance” under the Mosaic Law (Num. 18:21-24), remain in effect? Clearly, it can't! And we can now see that the argument in favor of tithing based upon the precedent of Abraham’s covenant being an "everlasting" covenant is hopelessly flawed. The problem (or rather, the solution) is that the argument applies equally well both to circumcision and to tithing. As goes the one, so goes the other. When we consider the spiritual principles that Paul taught us with regards to the command of literal circumcision being "everlasting" in the person and work of Christ, we can now see how this same principle also nullifies the command of literally tithing as an "everlasting" ordinance as well, yet now also spiritually realized as "everlasting" in the person and work of Christ. And no one would doubt that this also applies to the burnt offerings as well.

E. What About Noah? If Noah paid tithes to a high priest as Abraham did, then where was that righteous person to whom he paid tithes to on the ark? Surely, Abraham didn’t get his idea from Noah. As said before, Abraham was only practicing what those in his homeland had customarily practiced when they plundered other kings and nations, but only Abraham did it unto the true God and unto a righteous king of Jerusalem called Melchizedek.

F. Summary: Now either the Lord changed the law for the Israelites with respect to the way in which Abraham was commanded to tithe (if indeed he was commanded), or there was no such "commandment" imposed upon him at all to begin with! The latter is to be preferred, as already proven above; and more will be said below to give strength to this argument when we come to the subject of "vows" under the law, and what could or could not be vowed to the Lord, as Jacob did with regards to tithing. But, clearly, under the law of Moses a tithe was NOT commanded of the Lord from the “plunder” or “spoils of war.” And except in certain instances, God’s law on the spoils of war required all of it to be given to the Israelites who fought in the wars and to the people for whom they fought for. Additionally, God’s law on the tithe does not exact a tenth to be given from spoils of war, for it was completely from the agriculture of the people that God required the tithe. Again, it was strictly agrarian in nature.

Abraham’s tithe of the plunder was not a law handed-down to him by God, either before that time or afterward. Additionally, people of their own free-wills could give portions (or even all) from their plunder to whomever or for whatever; but they were not required of the Lord to do so.

As said before, the tithe was strictly from the agriculture of the land that the Lord would give to them as an inheritance when they entered the promised land, but not before that time. Additionally, those with other trades outside of agriculture were not required to tithe. And it was only under a theocracy of law that the tithe was "commanded," as well as with many other offerings. But with that said, all of those offerings and ceremonies were typical shadows of the spiritual realities that have now come upon us in the person and work of Christ.

Abraham’s offering up of a tithe of the plunder was like that of David’s “gift” to the elders, or the commander’s “gift” of gold to the Lord, or “some of” the plunder taken in the battles of David and his commanders dedicated for the repair of the temple of the Lord. And, as history attests, ungodly nations in antiquity gave 10% as a tribute or gift to their deities and kings; and so, Abraham, in a similar manner according to the customs of his day, gave a “gift” of a tenth to the one true God, and to the king and priest representing Him.

VI. Jacob’s Tithe: a vow promised.

A. As one would expect, we will soon see below that vow’s under the law of Moses in Leviticus 27 were not to be of those things that God had already required of the people to give to Him. And, vow’s, according to God's law in Leviticus 27, were all those things that were dedicated to God “freely,” being listed separate and distinct from those things that were already obligated for the people to do, such as giving the tithe: For the Lord has "already" said: “To that place…bring your burnt offerings and sacrifices, your TITHES and special gifts, what you have VOWED to give and your freewill offerings, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks….If you make a VOW…pay it….But if you refrain from making a VOW, you will not be guilty. Whatever your lips utter you must…do, because you made your VOW freely to the Lord…” (Deut. 12:4-7, 11; 23:21-23). Scripture is very clear on this. The tithe as a commandment mandatorily prescribed by God upon the people was not, and could not, by its very nature as a command, be vowed. The people "freely" vowed, but the tithe was mandatory and commanded by God of the people. This alone substantiates the fact that the tithe was not commanded of Jacob, nor of Abraham, prior to the giving of an actual commandment to tithe under the Mosaic Law. If it was, Jacob could not have vowed it. Jacob could have "refrained from making" that vow to tithe. But as noted above in the Law of Moses, tithing was separate and distinct from vows. And this is what I meant earlier when I said there would be further proof for us that Abraham was not "commanded" to tithe. Again, Jacob could not have "vowed" that which already belonged to the Lord. But as a "vow" Jacob could have "refrained" from offering the Lord a tithe; he was "free" to do so. But not so under the Law of Moses. Further proof lies below.

B. Even the Expositor’s Bible Commentary affirms this idea in its commentary with regards to vows in Leviticus 27: “[the tithe] could not be dedicated by a vow.” (vol. 2, p. 653).

C. And Unger‘s Bible Dictionary also adds: “Vows [also called Votive Offerings] were entirely voluntary, but once made were regarded as compulsory” (p. 1160). [1]

This clearly indicates to us that prior to a vow being vowed, it was entirely at the discretion of the individual whether to vow something or not. And Deut. 23:21-23, as already referred to above, substantiates all of this for us. Such was the case with Jacob; and it would be entirely out of step with the rest of the testimony of Scripture to state anything to the contrary solely with regards to him. If the example of Jacob teaches us anything with regards to offering a tithe it is, first of all, that it was not mandatory for him (or for us) to do. Secondly, it is something that anyone of us can freely choose to do, if we so wish to do so. And thirdly, once a vow is made, God expects us to be faithful to our commitments. Jesus said it was better for us to not make vows though, but rather to just let our nays be nays, and our yays be yays (cf. Mat. 5:33-38).

So, nothing more can be prescribed upon us from the example of Jacob than what has been laid out above before us. Since it has been clearly determined that the tithe was not commanded of Abraham, and only freely vowed by Jacob, then where does that place all of this? It places it squarely in the category of a freewill offering for them, and for us! There is to be firmly settled in our minds no more questions or doubts with regards to all of this. Here is the answer that everyone has been looking for with regards to this subject of whether one should tithe or not.

If we desire to tithe, then by all means we are free to do so. If we don’t desire to tithe, then it is also our God-given right and freedom not to do so. No one should be placed under the guilt trip of the false notion of a “curse” if they don’t tithe, and then feel compelled or coerced to give ten percent by the compulsory preaching and teaching tactics of many misinformed bible teachers, preachers, and pastors. Such teachers know not what they are teaching, or whereof they affirm, and are actually only making "merchandise" of unwary Christians as those false shepherds who were noted earlier by by God through Ezekiel. When Paul spoke of us giving to others, it was not by way of “commanding you” (2Cor. 8:8), nor by way of “compulsion” (2Cor. 9:7): “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver” (ibid). This is the heart of NT giving; not by way of a "command," but by way of "freely" giving what we have freely received.

D. D. S. H. Kellogg, also writes in his commentary on Leviticus concerning vows, that they are “a voluntary promise to God of something not due to Him by the law [or by some "decree" as in Malachi]” (Studies in Leviticus, p. 559).

E. Now let's study Leviticus 27 with regards to vows to the Lord. Of all the items that were allowed to be vowed (whether persons, vv. 1-9; animals, vv. 9-13; houses, vv. 14-15; or lands, vv. 16-25), three things are listed which could not be dedicated by a special vow to the Lord. These are:

1. “…the firstborn of an animal, since the firstborn already belongs to the Lord’ (v. 26 NIV);
2. Things already "devoted" (or "vowed," v. 28), and;
3. “A tithe of everything from the land…belongs to the Lord’ (v. 30). Again, similar to the firstborn, the tithe already "belonged" to the Lord. And as noted above in Duet. 12:4-7, 11; 23:21-23 that we just read, the tithe is categorically listed as a separate and distinct offering from a dedicatory vow.

F. Summary: Under the Law of Moses, a vow to the Lord of what He said already belonged to Him, or what He had already laid claim to, was not allowed. As noted, according to Leviticus 27, such a person would be breaking the law rather than upholding it. All things vowed could be redeemed, except for; 1) the firstborn animals that were considered clean, v. 27; 2) things already previously vowed, v. 28, and; 3) those things vowed to destruction, v. 29. This chapter in Leviticus on vows further proves beyond all doubt that if tithing was a decree, a commandment, or a requirement before the Mosaic Law was ever written, then Jacob would not have been allowed by God to vow that which ALREADY “belongs to the Lord.” God’s law, quite clearly, does not tolerate it.

VII. With regards to the Pharisees (and all Jews still under the law) who were said to "tithe" in Mat. 23:23, Jesus said: “This you ought to do.” And in verse one Jesus said to His disciples while still under those laws: "do everything they [the Pharisees] tell you to do." Clearly this is said to all those who, prior to the Cross, were still obligated to keep the law of the tithe. After the cross, it is to be expected that Jesus no longer required His disciples to do everything those Pharisees had told them to do. That old covenant had ended. And the fact that Jesus calls judgment, mercy, and faith “weightier matters of the law” reveals that the tithe itself was indeed one of the less weightier “matters of the law,” but a “law” nonetheless. And a "law" with all of its attending ceremonies and ordinances that has since been abolished at the cross. But judgment, faith, and mercy are still upheld in Christ’s new covenant. They are retained and enacted, just as the N.T. undoubtedly says that they should be. But all the passing shadows of the ceremonies have faded, giving way to the reality of Christ and His body for which those shadows were cast.

VIII. Paul’s examples of giving in 1Cor. 9:7-14; 16:1-3 and 2Cor. 8-9:

A. Five examples are given by Paul in 1Cor. 9 for taking care of those who work in the ministry (and not just the example of those who received tithes and offerings under the Mosaic Law). And Paul is only saying this in order to validate taking care of those who have the oversight over us, in the same way that the women did for Jesus (and no more and no less). These five examples that Paul gives to us are: a soldier, a husbandman of a vineyard, a sheepherder, an ox, and those who worked in the temple. By Paul including those who worked in the temple as being worthy of being fed by the people, he was not endorsing that we should give ceremonial tithes and offerings today, but only some kind of sustenance for their services rendered. And if Paul had been endorsing "tithing" according the the Law of Moses, it would not have been an endorsement for people to give or collect money, as we have already learned from studying the OT laws with regards to all of this, but it would have been offerings that were “agrarian” in nature, or agricultural. On the contrary, Paul gives us many examples from various occupations or labors in life to substantiate that a laborer (whether man or beast) is worthy of receiving food and care from others. No case is being made here by Paul for people to tithe, but for compensation for various kinds of work, whatever a persons trade might be. If it is a soldier, three hots and cot; if it is a vinedresser, grapes; if a shepherd, milk; if an ox, grain; and if a worker at the former old temple, it was being afforded the opportunity to partake in what was being offered by the people. No person is capable of working full time for nothing. And although other apostles made use of such a right, Paul chose not to do so, working with his own hands as a tent-maker, not only to provide for his own needs but also for the needs of other.

B. The tithe (according to many Protestants and Catholics) is also seen to have found its continuance in 1Cor. 16:1-3 which, in fact, was only a "freewill" collection or contribution for the poor saints in Jerusalem (see verse 3 with Acts 11:27-30; Rom. 15:25-28; Gal. 2:9, 10; 2Cor. 8:1-6). But even some churches today, who attempt to impose the tithe upon the N.T. believer, do not teach that 1Cor. 16:1-2 refers to tithing. But some erroneously suppose that the giving here that is denoted to be in “proportion” to ones own prosperity, that this word “proportion” implies, according to them, "ten percent." But nothing could be further from the truth. Paul, who was well familiar with the O.T., was most likely using the same example found in Deut. 16:10, which says, “Then celebrate…the Lord your God by giving A FREEWILL OFFERING in proportion to the blessings the Lord your God had given you” (NIV). Basically, Paul is saying here, “freely you have received, so freely give.” And, so as God has freely blessed us, we should likewise freely bless others. And later on in 2Cor. 9:10-11 and 8:11-12, Paul recants what he had earlier told the Corinthians to do in 1Cor. 16:1-2: “Now He who supplies seed to the sower and bread for food will also supply and INCREASE YOUR STORE OF SEED and will enlarge the harvest of your righteousness. You will be made rich in every way SO THAT YOU CAN BE GENEROUS on every occasion…Now finish the work, so that your eager willingness to do it may be matched by your completion of it, ACCORDING TO YOUR MEANS….The gift is acceptable ACCORDING TO WHAT ONE HAS, NOT ACCORDING TO WHAT ONE DOESN’T HAVE.” Once again, Paul is reiterating what he had formerly spoken to the Corinthians to do in his first letter to them, which as we can all very well see was giving "in proportion" to the ability in which God had enabled them to give. And it was giving "in proportion" to how the Old Testament clearly defines this for us; which was "a freewill offering" based upon what God has given to us. It is definitely not giving by way of some "commandment" or law, as 2Cor. 8:8 states. And it is definitely not paying a tithe.

C. Out of all the offerings that believers gave, Paul, as well as the other Apostles, had the right to receive out of those offerings a sustenance for themselves. And as Paul denotes in 1Corinthians, some of the apostles exercised this right. In the early Church, offerings were “distributed to each as anyone had need” (Acts 2:45; 4:35; see also 2Cor. 8-9), and this must have also included the needs of the Apostles. Occasionally offerings were collected just for Paul’s’ needs (see 2Cor. 11:7-8); but at Corinth, Paul chose to forgo this right.

IX. Hebrew 7: Tithing validated Melchizedek’s priesthood.

A. Is the message of Heb. 7 all about how Christians are to still pay tithes? Some in the Church today actually teach that this chapter, at the very least, insinuates this. But this is not the point of the author’s statements at all. Why would the author of Hebrews be teaching about a change (and many more of them at that), if the believers were to still to keep the "command" of Moses with regards to tithing? And even if tithing were insinuated here for us to still do, it would not be by way of a "command" under the Law of Moses, but by way of a onetime "freewill" offering that Abraham gave to Melchizedek. As denoted earlier under "D" in section V, only the Levites had "a commandment...to take tithes" (Heb. 7:5).

It is absolutely illogical to teach that the book of Hebrews abolishes every single ordinance that pertains to the Levitical priesthood, but not the tithe. In Hebrews chapter 7, the author was emphasizing the validity and the superiority of Christ’s priesthood, by the fact that Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek by being in the loins of Abraham when Abraham paid tithes. The fact that the tithe is mentioned as being given to Melchizedek was just to further “validate” that another priest, who was not of the Levitical order, was to actually supersede them. The point or emphasis the author is making is not about tithing, but about there being another priest beside the Levites that was after the order of Melchizedek. The focus on tithing is only secondary to the primary focus and attention which is actually on the superiority of Christ over the Levites. That is what this entire epistle is all about.

Tithing, along with all the other ceremonies in the Tabernacle of Moses, “was a figure for the time then present” (Heb. 9:9). This is the purpose for which the entire book of Hebrews is written. Tithing is not an inherent, eternal, holy moral principle that anyone is consciously cognizant of. But if there is any eternal principle to be understood by it, it is in this fact: that there is a remnant or portion of all the peoples of the earth who belong to the Lord. And like the literal tithe under the law, we as God’s "portion," "inheritance," and "allotment" are all “MOST HOLY TO THE LORD.”

X. N.T. Giving and Receiving:

A. With regards to giving to the ministers of the gospel, Jesus didn’t tell His disciples to tell people to tithe to them or make it compulsory in any way, shape, manner or form.
No such teachings would come from the lips of Christ, or any of His disciples. Jesus and His disciples could not “legally” command people to pay tithes to them, for they were not from the tribe of Levi. They had no authority from the Scriptures to impose such a legal system upon their followers. And when that former legal system ended, along with the Levite, so did that law respecting tithes which were paid to the “Levites.” And when that legal system ended, it didn’t make it "legal" to "command" people in the church to tithe in an attempt to enforce it upon the people to do so. Such an idea is absolutely ludicrous! Christ and His apostles would have none of that. Jesus told the twelve, “Freely you have received, freely give. Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his keep.” (Mat. 10:8-10). In other words, your provisions will be provided for you if you do what I have told you to do. Just have faith that the faithful worker in God’s kingdom will be rewarded!

1. “The Lord appointed 72 others, and sent them two by two," saying, "Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages…eat what is set before you…” (Lk. 10:1-8). He did not say, “compel them to give unto you, and compel them to give unto you a tithe at that.” Jesus basically was saying, “If you are found WORTHY, you will be taken care of—I promise you. For there will be those who will consider you worthy and offer to take care of you,” just as those around Him did so for Him, as we see in the next example.
2. In Lke. 8:1-3, it says, “Jesus traveled about from one town and village to another, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God. The twelve were with Him, and also some women who had been cured of evil spirits and diseases: Mary Magdalene…Joanna the wife of Cuza, the manager of Herod’s household; Susanna; and many others. These women were helping to support them out of their own means.” Notice it says “them.” Jesus and His apostles were all being taken care of by these women, just as Jesus has described would be done above in Luke 10:1-8. Praise God!
3. In agreement with Christ above, Paul also writes, “In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” (1 Cor. 9:14). Clearly, Paul did not understand this any differently than how Christ lived and showed His disciples by way of example. It is the example that was just illustrated for us above in Lke. 8:1-3. They were to preach the gospel of faith, and to live by that faith in which they preached. They were “in faith” to believe and to receive of such things as would be offered to them. This was “living from the gospel” a life of faith that they were preaching unto others to do. This is all that was “commanded” of them to do, and nothing more. They were not being told by Christ to command others to provide for them, but just commanded to preach the gospel. And when they faithfully did that, they would receive their living through the faith of that gospel that was being preached unto others to live by.
4. Again Paul says, “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘the worker deserves his wages.’” (1Tim. 5:17-18).
   
   Note that Paul says this after having just said that the Church should “honor widows who are widows indeed” in verse 5. Was the Church to pay tithes to these widows? Of course not. They were to be taken care of in the same way that the widows were taken care of in Acts 6:1 and 4:35, through that which was freely given by all the saints for “the daily distributions…as everyone had need.” These elders were to be “doubly” (or especially) honored even more so. And in whatever manner these widows were being honored, the elders were to be doubly honored.
   
   This idea of being esteemed more highly than others with "double" honor is found in 1Chr.11:20. Here in First Chronicles Abishai is elevated to a place of honor where he is more highly esteemed than the rest of his peers, with the NIV saying here that he was “doubly honored.” Again, this is where Paul got his idea from. Abishai was recognized for his work and elevated to a position greater than that of his peers. Such is to be the case with the elders “who rule well.” Like the widows who were worthy to be put on roll with those whose needs were to be provided for out of the daily distributions, the elders likewise are to be recognized from out of the daily distributions, but even more so! Elders who do not rule well, along with unworthy widows, are not even to be considered for such honors.

B. Jesus’ mandate for giving and receiving was: “Give and it shall be given unto you.” (Lke. 6:38). Everyone is to live a life of faith, from the shepherds to the sheep.

C. Paul said we are not to give out of “compulsion” (2Cor. 8:7, NIV). The Greek word used here for "compulsion" is again used by Paul twice for those who were making it compulsory to be circumcised by saying that the law required it (Gal. 2:3, 14; 6:12). The word is translated often: “compel.”

1. The meaning of “compulsory” is that which is: "required, obligatory, mandatory" (Webster’s).
2. The Greek word is anagkee (Strongs #318), and literally means: "out of necessity or by constraint." And to “constrain” means to dictate the actions or thoughts of others; to force, pressure or persuade.
3. Anything commanded, required, or obligatory under the law (tithing included) was considered “compulsory” for the people to do. Paul says that our giving is not to be out of “compulsion;” that is, as something that is imposed upon us as mandatory, required, or obligatory for us to do.
4. Paul made it plain to the Corinthians, and to us, what he meant by us not giving out of compulsion: He said, “I am not commanding you” (2Cor. 8:8). And yet just the opposite is being preached over many church pulpits today. Many naïve Christians are being told today, by those who are no less naïve, that we are “commanded” by God to give no less than ten percent; and even “compelling” us to do so with feelings of guilt and fear---and even with the fear of being "cursed" with a curse according to the words of Malachi for non-compliance. This is how all CULTS operate, as seen even in the cults of the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons who even want to know what the people are earning, so that they can make sure the people are giving what they are suppose to be giving. I even know of someone who was in a church where the pastor asked all those in the congregation who were tithing, to stand up, so the rest of the church could see who was faithfully tithing, and to also subtly see all those who were NOT tithing and also make them feel ashamed for not having tithed. All those people who stood up got their reward; it was the praise of men, but not the praise of God. What they are doing is to be seen of men, while all the while God is looking the other way. What He does see though, is the widow who gives her last mite. The former is done out of "duty," the other out of love.

D: We are to freely give as we see the needs arise:

1. “Moreover, as you Philippians know, in the early days of your acquaintance with the gospel, when I set out from Macedonia, not one church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving, except you only;…for even when I was in Thessalonica, you sent me aid again and again when I was in need….And my God will meet all your needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus.” (Php. 4:15-16, 19). As they faithfully gave from willing hearts, God would faithfully meet all their needs too.
2. “Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need….All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.” (Acts 2:45; 4:32-35).
3. “Share with God’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality” (Romans 12:13).
4. “Share all good things with his instructor….Therefore as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong the family of believers” (Gal. 6:6-10). Here’s the “double honor” idea again.
5. “Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously. Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work” (2Cor. 9:6-8).

XI. It is a well-documented and historical fact that records from the early church fathers, or from anywhere else for that matter, do not show any evidence that tithing was being practiced during the first 500 years of church history.

A. The Encyclopedia Britannica tells us that, “The Christian Church depended at first on voluntary gifts from its members.” Hasting’s Dictionary of the Apostolic Church says, “It is admitted universally that the payment of tithes or the tenths of possessions for sacred purposes did not find a place within the Christian Church during the age covered by the apostles and their immediate successors.” The Encyclopedia Americana also declares: “It (tithing) was not practiced in the early Christian Church.” Even the Catholic Church, notorious for its many finance raising schemes, says in the New Catholic Encyclopedia: “The early Church had no tithing system ... it was not that no need of supporting the Church existed or was recognized, but rather that other means appeared to suffice.” And we all now know what that "other means" was, as has been already noted above.

B. And as briefly alluded to earlier, Jewish Rabbis today do not collect tithes because they know that only Levites can collect the tithe. And they say there is now no need to, since the temple is destroyed and the levitical priests no longer minister. Today, Rabbi’s in synagogues work for a living, and accept freewill offerings from their congregations. This all sounds more like the apostle Paul, than it does of those in the church today. And I can't even believe I am saying this, but the Jews of today have got it more right on all of this than most of those who are in the church, when you would think that just the opposite would be the case.

XII. The following is all the Scriptures with regards to the subject of tithng: Gen. 14:18-24; 28:20-22; 31:13 (the “vow” of Jacob remembered by God); Lev. 27:30-34; Num. 18:21-28; Deut. 12:4-19; 14:22-29; 26:12-15; 2Chr. 31:2-12; Isa. 6:13; Neh. 10:37-39; 12:44; 13:4-13; Amos 4:4-5; Mat. 23:1-2, 23; Lke. 18:12; Heb. 7. A “tenth” is also alluded to in many of the sacrificial offerings, but those “tenths” (or tithes) are not listed here. Again, please read my article: The Typology of the Tithe, Firstfruits and Firstborn for a more comprehensive study on those texts of Scripture as well.

XIII. Below is also an outline of the progressive revelation of the tithe in the Mosaic Law: As with many doctrines formulated in the Bible, the tithe is progressively revealed to us in piecemeal form. Upon reading all the Scriptures in one sitting and gathering all the data in one cohesive manner, it is clearly seen that there is only one tithe spoken of, not three (or 30%). It was "one" tithe that was brought to the tabernacle of Moses and the temple of Solomon every third year and enjoyed by all the participants that were mentioned earlier above. The Jews were initially and formally instructed about this "one" tithe "every third year" in Deut. 14:28. It was then later stated again for reemphasis and for remembrance in Deut. 26:12. And again, many years later through the prophet Amos (4:4), God reiterates what they were boasting outwardly as an already stated and known matter-of-fact of bringing the stated tithe "every three years," and that these "outward" observances were of no value to them, since inwardly their hearts were far from the Lord. God does not mention three tithes by the mouth of His prophet Amos, but only "one" tithe that He says was offered "every third year"—the year He said it was to be offered way back in the days when the Law of Moses was first drawn up in Deut. 14:28 and 26:12.

If someone were to come to me as a minister of God and tell me they were tithing to me out of "necessity" or by way of a "commandment," then I would have to tell them: “Keep your offering.” But if out of an unfeigned heart and free-will spirit in devotion to God as Abraham did for Melchizedek, then I just might say, “By all means, feel free to do so!” By all means do what your heart necessitates for you to do as unto the Lord out of such a spirit, but not by way of a "commandment" or "out of compulsion" from others.

May God bless all of you as you "freely" and unreservedly give unto the Lord out of hearts of compassion for all people, but especially to those who are of the household of faith (Gal. 6:10), and even "doubly" so for those who rule well as Overseers. May peace be unto you, and unto all who follow after this rule.

The Progressive Revelation of the Tithe:
Not Three Tithes, but One
(to whom, when, and where)

A. The Introduction of the Tithe:
Leviticus 27
(all the produce, fruit trees, and livestock “holy to the Lord,” and not to be “vowed.” Non-agricultural occupations and someone with only 9 animals, or less, exempt)

B. The Initial Recipients of the Tithe:
Numbers 18
(Levites and Priests)

C. Additional Recipients of the Tithe:
(on the day the offering was made)
Deuteronomy 12
(the Givers)

D. Additional Recipients and the Year of the Tithe:
Deuteronomy 14
(the Aliens, the Fatherless, and the Widows.
Store it in Levite towns, gather it every third year)

E. Third Year of the Tithe Re-emphasized:
Deuteronomy 26
(Also, givers not to eat it while in mourning;
not to transfer it while unclean;
nor should any have been offered to the dead)

F. Tithe Reinstated by Hezekiah:
2Chronicles 31
(Storehouse in temple built)

G. Tithe Reinstated by Nehemiah:
Nehemiah 10-14
(fruit of all our trees and new wine and oil)

H. Re-emphasis of the Tithe Being Brought Every Third Year:
Amos 4

I. Exhortation To Do What They Knew To Do, But Were Not Doing:
Malachi 3
(“bring all tithes and offerings,”
“defraud [not] laborers of their wages,
[nor] oppress the widows, the fatherless, or deprive the aliens”)

Footnote:

[1] We see this by the fact that God holds Jacob accountable for the vow he made by reminding him of it later (Gen. 31:13). And neither do we hear God telling Jacob that he could not vow what had already been commanded of him to do, if indeed it was commanded of him. Clearly it was not.