OK. A bit of seriousness tonight. Have been meaning to blog this for awhile, but schedule has been busy. But it is even busier next month, so 'no day like today.' I have had questions about tithing put to me quite a bit lately, so I figured getting something general in writing would make specific responses easier. The following are some of my thoughts and reasons for thinking them, but with an eye to being brief. Therefore, references and full proofs are at a minimum, but you are free to comment and I can begin a new post with specific questions/concerns/comments.
Introduction
The tithe is an ancient Jewish concept/tradition. It means 'tenth' and refers to the Old Testament (OT) practice of giving a tenth of one's crop to YHWH (although the very first tithe mentioned was the spoils of war that Abraham gave Melchizedek). It was the last of the levitical codes to be given. How one 'gave' to YHWH was by giving it to the priesthood serving at the Tabernacle/Temple (Levites) who were therefore unable to support themselves by other means. Why one gave to YHWH seems in order to be a reminder that YHWH had given them all that they have, anyway.
Current Practice
It is currently generally accepted in much of Protestant Christianity (I am not sure about Orthodox or Roman Christianity) that this practice was meant to continue after the Messiah's enthronement, except that the 'local church' or 'church' leadership replaced the priesthood and money replaced crops. In some circles this idea is hinged strongly to the concept of duty/obligation. In some circles of those circles it is hinged to the concept of blessing and curses: if you give a tithe, you will be blessed by God, but if you don't, you will be under a curse. The basis of this is usually explained by Malachi's prophecy to the newly returned from exile Jews who were rebuilding the Temple (about 400 years before the Messiah). In som other circles it is taught that a tithe is required of everyone, regardless of your situation. It is often taught as a means of testing your faith/faithfulness.
Objections
The following are some reasons I think the concept of tithe needs to be rethought:
1. There is no NT mandate for such a practice. We are not Hebrews living within the covenant anticipating its eventual fulfillment. Rather, we are the worldwide family who is living in the reality of the fulfillment of YHWH's covenant with Abram in the Messiah and who are called to celebrate, embody and proclaim the reality that the Life of the Age to Come ('eternal life' in some translations) has already been given and we are living it.
2. The early church practiced much giving, and of more than, but certainly not less than, just money, but never felt compelled to explain it in terms of tithe. Likewise, there was no expectation that the poor among them would give, rather they were to be the recipients of what was given.
3. The idea of 'local church' seems to ignore the fluidity of the community of the people of God renewed and established in the Messiah and through the holy Spirit. It necessitates giving to structures with the name 'church', but really mean the organized, often self-appointed, hierarchy usually called 'leadership.' It denigrates the support of other believers who are in hard circumstances to be something less than giving to the church (even though this is more in line with the early church practice and mandates, and even though 'the church' is really the community of believers, not who is 'leading' them).
4. The analogy of Temple priesthood and church leadership ignores one of the biggest and most cataclysmic shifts that occured in early NT thinking, namely, the Temple, though appropriate for one act of the story, was passing away and was not fit for the next stage in the Creator's plan to restore his creation. The Temple system was not only corrupt and stood under Jesus' judgement as rightful king of Israel, but also he himself and the community he was forming around him were the actual REPLACEMENTS of the Temple. The Temple would soon be destroyed in judgement, but the community that was the fulfillment of what the Temple always anticipated would survive the cosmic judgement about to come (which came in 70 A.D.). The priesthood was therefore passing away as well, since Jesus became the priest for all and perpetually. The new community was not to model itself on the Temple system, but to be the enitrely new creation entity of hope in a despairing world. They were the place one could come to to receive forgiveness and to see the image and likeness of God--they were to be where the Presence of God dwelt and could be met face to face.
5. It is hopelessly caught up in biblical interpretation that finds it too easy to pick a scripture and generalize it to find a truth that is supposed to be true for everyone everywhere, and ignores the significance and uniqueness of historical events. In other words it feeds into an entire way of reading the Bible that repeatedly ignores things like #1 and #4 above.
Preliminary Conclusion
That's enought to get started. The next chance I get I will post some thoughts on a way forward for reimagining what it means to be God's people and what place giving has in that scheme. It may be awhile before that appears, but please don't think that I think everyone ought to stop giving. But as a foretaste of what is to come, it is not just one of many duties we perform: "to give," but the entire purpose God has renewed us for is to bless others, and especially the poor and orphans and widows and those unable to fend for themselves. Getting rid of the tithe doesn't make the Christian life easier, it prepares the way for a more arduous and all-consuming role God's purposes.
4 comments:
So far, I agree with everything you have said. Be encouraged.
I agree with almost everything--especially lifting the legalism. Giving is a privilege and a blessing. I disagree with point #2--although I'm not sure how the early church practiced, it seems to me to go against kingdom principles that the poor should only receive and not give. I'm quite sure God made ways for the poor + the priesthood to give, not to mention how Jesus told the parable of the poor widow who gave all she had. I think there is an irony in kingdom principles: the more you give, the more you receive. However, if you limit some people to just receiving (or just giving) then the cycle of blessing is broken and things become rather one-way and inward-focussed. Besides, who is to say who is too poor? Wealth is tremendously relative.
Thanks for your inputs, George and Anonymous. As far as A's disagreement, I would have to say that my point in #2 is not necessarily what should be or not, or whether it goes against 'kingdom principles' or not. The point is quite simply that the early church did practice giving, that the poor (or at least the destitute, widows, and orphans) were not expected to contribute to collections that were being taken up for them anyway, and that, in spite of a very early and very generous practice in giving (more anon), they NEVER used the language of 'tithe' to explain it or endorse it. This is borne out in multiple early historical documents, including the Didache and the writings of some of the early church fathers.
I am not arguing that our standard ought to be the early church. But I am arguing that if the early church did NOT use the language and concept of the tithe, we ought at least (1) to be asking ourselves why not and (2) to admit the post-Christ-event community life did not initially choose to use the 'the tithe' and that it's use post-Christ is somewhat of a novelty. We ought at least at that point have the integrity to ask ourselves on what biblical basis can we translate the 'tithe' concept of Israel so directly to the church when (1) the people most likely to do so chose not to (the early church was mostly Jewish) and (2) we don't find it necessary to continue using the kosher laws and the civil laws of Israel under the Old Covenant.
Incidentally, while I do not fully endorse the way these people handle scripture, I think this site is pretty decent and might give some a lot of stuff to think about. I especially appreciate the determination of what it would mean if we REALLY gave a tithe the way the OT describes it (something like 23% of our income instead of the 10% we usually hear promulgated).
I would tend to question the validity of the concept of the existence of 'kingdom principle' as applied here, but this is already a too-long comment and probably deserves to be a post in itself.
How would you explain Matt.23:23, where Jesus puts an emphasis on justice, mercy, and faithfullness, but says not to neglect the former(the tithe)? Also, if one is regularly attending a church don't you think there's some responsibility in contributing to that organization?
Post a Comment