tithes in Gen

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

> [Hanson, Bruce]  
> I wish to only cover two scriptures in this post or it gets too long. I
> restarted this string because the others are becoming unclear with all the
> mixed aspects. Since scripture should not be of private interpretation I
> have included extrabiblical references.
> 
> One Argument for tithes in the  NT as I understand it is:  Tithes predates
> the Law so it can post date the law also. The scriptures used are Gen
> 14:20 and Gen 28:22
> 
> KJV: Gen. 14:20 says Abram blessed (thanked if you will) the most high God
> by giving a tithe of the spoils of war to Melchizedek (king of Salem - a
> place afterward called Jerusalem).
> 
> According to "The Torah, A modern commentary, edited by W. Gunther Plaut,
> Union of America Hebrew Congregation, New York, 1981 page 104" the
> translation reads: and [Abram] gave him a tenth of everything.
> 
> According to "Henry, Matthew, Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Bible
> 1991" : This may be looked upon; 1)As a gratuity presented to Malchizedek,
> by way of return for his tokens of respect, or  2)As an offering vowed and
> dedicated to the most high God.
> 
> According to "John R. KohlenbergerIII ,The Interlinear NIV Hebrew-English
> Old Testament, Zondervan" And blessed be  God most high  who delivered
> your enemies into your hand than Abram gave him a tenth of everything.
> 
> Every reference I have looked up that does not use the Vulgate (The Latin
> Vulgate is the catholic church Bible that was used as a base reference to
> translate the KJV) as its base (in other words we have to go back to the
> earliest available Greek and Hebrew manuscripts) uses the word tenth in
> this verse. The commentaries I have researched would also indicate it was
> an offering with the value being 10%. Only the value matches the law of
> tithes as outlined later in the OT. Abram had vowed that he would take
> nothing of the spoils of this conquest so that the kings could never say
> they made him rich - he gave it all away. This example does not show a
> requirement from God. Nothing historically or scripturally says Abram
> continued to do this - that would be an assumption I would not make when
> trying to see what the Bible actually says. In fact the follow on verse
> (Gen. 28:22 - see next comment) would indicate that he did not pass this
> practice on to his offspring. The real key here, if we do not want to
> accept the word difference, is that this was VOLUNTARY. It was NOT
> REQUIRED. It was out of his thankfulness he gave 10%. 
> 
> If, in the NT we wish to give, VOLUNTARLY, 10% to our church God will
> Bless us. If we choose to give less or more, VOLUNTARLY, God will bless
> us. What we give, VOLUNTARLY, is not required so can not be something that
> belongs to someone else. Therefor giving or not giving is NOT stealing.
> 
> Gen. 28:22 Jacob vows a tenth of his future increase to God for his
> protection from his brothers wrath. 
> 
> Even the KJV uses the word tenth here. Jacob is making a bargain with God
> for protection, not fulfilling an obligation to give god what is already
> his. If that were the case, how silly would his position seem, even to
> himself; "God, I will give you what I already owe you if you protect me".
> Even so, clearly, this is initiated by Jacob VOLUNTARILY. Also, nothing in
> the OT would indicate that Jacob paid a tenth before this to God. If he
> had, it would again be silly for him to say to God if you protect me I
> will continue to pay my tenth. This is a new vow to God done voluntarily,
> not a pre-law example of OT tithes in my opinion.
> 
> In neither of the above cases is God saying; "It is mine" or, "You're
> stealing if you don't give it" or, "You are required to do this".
> Therefore, if we wish to use this as our basis for NT tithes we should
> also not be using words like stealing and owed to God when we preach or
> teach it. If we teach God loves a cheerful giver and this church would
> like you to consider 10% as an amount vs.  if you don't give 10% you are
> not giving God what is his (the implication is you are stealing from God)
> this would more than likely not be an issue. It is the fact that salvation
> is attached to it and the clergy claims the amount as their personal money
> that makes it such a hot topic.
> 
> In NT terms Acts 5:4 says it all. Wasn't the money all yours? Couldn't you
> do what you wanted with it? The apostle has the opportunity to reaffirm
> that he only had to give 10% because that would have been the tithe - he
> didn't. He affirmed that he didn't have to give any if he didn't want to.
> I believe his problem was lying not his lack of giving all or 10% for that
> matter.
> 
> 
> May God Bless you All!
> Bruce Hanson
> bruce.hanson@lmco.com
>