« October 2005 | Main | December 2005 »
November 13, 2005
Responce to Comments on Tithe
Here's my overall responce to the comments regarding my post on Tithe: (http://www.notourhome.com/riley/archives/2005/11/tithe.html)
At initial glace of the comments, my over all question wasn't really confirmed or denied. I agree when those commenting state we can't excercise authority over and we must exercise patience with growth and God's conviction (or lack thereof) in the saints.
But my overall question, is 10% gross income as a matter of Tithe an enforceable standard? Aka, can you tell someone they are living in sin if they are not tithing?
The message I'm getting from some of our Elders, is no to that question, though I am not understanding why. And I agree with Tony about Abraham's example to the Christ arch-type, but I was told recently, examples pre-dating the Mosaic Covenant, don't necessarly mean they are to be followed as command now.
To rephrase: Is telling someone murder is wrong and they are in sin to do so, at par with a base standard of generosity as defined by 10% of gross income? (To illustrate my question by being absurd.)
Which then brought me to another question. If someone told you they were planning on murdering someone, how far would you go to actually stop that sin from being committed? This being an absurd example, but illustrates my point: Where is the line of no action where we allow someone the choice to sin and take no deliberate action (which will seem against them) to prevent them from sinning? What criteria is used?
Do you see what I am driving at? In the murder case we'll do what ever we can to prevent that sin? So why don't we do this with all sins? If not to be done for all sins, where's the line?
Aside from desiring to dialong on the matter of Tithing as an enforceable Biblical standard, (or the practicle means of working out the command to be generous), I also want to call to attention that part of the Great Commission is to "teach them [new converts/disciples] all that I [Christ] have commanded you." So for me, this issue has brought up a deep issue that I'm still processing on about the 'core' truths that must be tought and enforced. And that brings up another question, what means of enforcement is appropiate?
The example of the Psalmist, though he was a King, said something to me about putting up with sin in others, "I will set before my eyes no vile thing. The deeds of faithless men I hate; they will not cling to me" (v3) "Whoever slanders his neighbor in secret, him will I put to silence; whoever has haughty eyes and a proud heart, him will I not endure" (v5) "No one who practices deceit will dwell in my house; no one who speaks falsely will stand in my presence. Every morning I will put to silence all the wicked in the land; I will cut off every evildoer from the city of the LORD." (v7,8) [Pslam 101 NIV]
I'm not sure what example here, if any, should be followed or how that should play out.
As before, comments, insights or questions are appreciated. :)
Posted by mtriley at 03:57 PM | Comments (9)
November 10, 2005
Tithe
23:44, I should be heading to bed. But I feel the urge to rant! Well, at least share my peace and thought process. I am hoping some of you intellectuals out there will take some time to dialog with me on this subject of the Tithe. Maybe I have theological mis-understanding or I'm just ignorant -- what do you think? {Maybe writing out what I think will help clarify things... well, take a moment and pray!)
There are few topics I love, Tithing is one of them. I'll paint the picture...
While serving as Stonebrook's Finance Overseer, I was charged with the task of informing various leaders that giving is down compared to last year and that we could be looking at upto $45,800 in budget cuts. In my e-mail I made the following comment, "However, church attendance is up. In my opinion, we need to be praying and challenging people to be faithful in giving/tithing."
So, later in the day, one of the leaders says to me, "You know tithing isn't commanded right?" I affirmed this statement (though I don't agree with it, I know our Pastor's would) and this person added, "You seem to always be concerned about the tithe" and we battered back and forth about what I actually said. Well I toned it down, challenging (not commanding) people to be faithful in 'giving/tithing'. (I used the word giving....) And we talked briefly how giving is a reflection of the heart. The leader wanted us to be sure to be teaching that, the heart matter. Which is fine and any time the Pastor's teach on it, the heart matter is always first. [Rightfully so, I might add.]
So in the New Covenant, sealed by Christ's blood, am I not to Tithe? The command was never explicitly repeated right? Hmmm... I wonder....
This really bugs me. I can't command someone to tithe. "O really?", I ask myself. So before I go off into a theological proof, (or at least in my mind it's a proof), let me share a brief back ground of myself.
Background: I've been serving in a financial/money management role for The Rock since Spring of 2000. I've been working for Stonebrook since Spring of 2002. Add that all up, I've been dealing with money related matters for the Kingdom of God for five years. The only reason I can say, at my age, I can do my job, is because the first three years serving The Rock, God pounded into me a heart about money, the Kingdom and stewardship that was directly from His hand. I recall those first few years, they were tough as God pounded, banged and beat on my heart into submission so that I could be in a position to do my job now. Hense forth, on this topic, I will admit, I'm a little fanatical. (Ask me more later if you want me to fill in more detail.)
Theological Reasoning #1:
This thought is rather new. I've got another line of reasoning, but this one came to me tonight, so I thought I would elaborate on it first.
Can anyone think of any moral law stated under the Old Covenant not explicitly repeated or strengthed in the New Covenant? I might be missing something, but I cannot think of one. In fact, Christ seemed to go the extra mile in making matters worse for the sinner. Adultry is the most noteable. Old Covenant law was "Do not Commit Adultry" (Duet. 5:18) Christ took it to the nth degree by saying, "Do not look lustfully" because when you do you are committing adultry in the heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)
Roughly speaking:
**Old Covenant - actions
**New Covenant - heart, motive and actions.
To take this a step further, if God's character is un-changing, then doesn't that mean the standard for right and wrong didn't change between Covenants? And this is the value of the Old Testament. To peer into the moral understanding of the law... (topic for another time.)
Is Tithing moral?
If yes, then it can't be revoked on a change of covenants for that violates the notion that God is unchanging in His character. Thus we can command poeple to Tithe.
If not, then we can't command people to tithe, or it might mean something else and not directly imply I cannot command people to tithe.
Actually this line of reasoning brought up a broader question, "Is choosing to or not to follow God a matter of moral choice or is it simply free choice devoid of moral consequences, just as picking chocolate over vanilla ice cream?"
If it is moral to follow God, wouldn't that imply my responce in following Him has moral implications?
If I'm making any sense, then I think you will see where I'm going. If not, then maybe I'm on the wrong track or not making sense at all.
Theological Reasoning #2:
This proof I rather prefer. Seems more strait forward, at least to me. Hopefully someone will illustrate where I'm off. (You might be wondering why I'm taking that stance, but it's hard to argue with an Elder who agrees that we cannot command to Tithe, so I want to be cautious in presenting a line of reasoning.) [But as you can tell, or will shortly, based upon my understanding of Scripture, I don't see how we can't command the Tithe.]
"Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share." (I Timothy 6:17-18 NIV)
What standard of generosity should I use? 1% of gross income? 5%? 10%? $1, or maybe $100? Or is it $1,000,000?
If you take any class in appropiate Biblical interpretation, you would learn not to pull from extra-Biblical sources for a means of interpretation. So I'm forced to look at the Bible, the examples and other passages where it is clear about what it means to be generous.
So I'll turn to my favorite example. Please read Genesis 28.
Aside from the fact this example pre-dates Levitical Law, what is bare responce to an understanding of God's presence?
1) Fear (v17)
2) Alter (v18)
3) Vow (v20-22)
4) (as part of the vow) Tithe. (v22)
Levitical Law commanded the Tithe. So how in good conscience can we look at the command "Command them to be, ..., generous" and let it mean anything less than Tithe? The bare responce to God, for who He is, was to Tithe. Abraham did it, Jacob did it, why in the world would I not do like wise? Is Abraham not heralded as an exmple in Hebrews 11? {I'm making the point this isn't an example like David and Bathseeba that is a negative example. A negative example being one not meant to be followed but learned from.)
I suppose you could make the case that I Timothy 6:17-18 is solely addressing rich people. But that is so shaky (and seems to be poor exegesis in light of the context of the passage). Well, we can look to other commands of generosity. But needless to say, if you are living in America, even if you are dirt poor, you are most definitely, compared to the rest of the world, "rich in this world."
Hopefully I've provided enough material to outline my train of thought and reasoning without needing to do an indepth proof.
Let me know what you think.
-MTR
Posted by mtriley at 11:52 PM | Comments (11)