Do you know your scripture?

[BenFTW]

Ruffle whatever feathers you like.
I care about the truth, less about how people feel.

Please explain further.
You've said above that obligated giving is not in effect now, and you've stated that repeatedly.
But now you're saying if us?

So you've finally read post #22, and realized no one is defending a compulsory tithe? Okay, so what else can we discuss? Giving? Sowing and reaping? I understand the point of your post, and the question's intent. Do you want a debate? I'm sure someone might play devil's advocate so you can get everything off your chest. lol

 

[posthuman]

Should I mention that a tithe, giving a tenth, happened before the Law of Moses, and therefore is not subject to us not being under the Law, and therefore, could be argued that it is still in effect? Oh no, I wouldn't want to ruffle feathers.

i recently heard a Messianic rabbi explaining that Abel brought a thanksgiving offering, and Cain gave a tithe - and that this is key to understanding why God had regard for Abel's offering and did not regard Cain's... so, *possibly* an earlier, and in a certain sense more relevant instance of giving than Abraham giving war spoils to Melchizedek. but perhaps we oughtn't go there right now either...

 

[Adam4Eve]

So you've finally read post #22, and realized no one is defending a compulsory tithe? Okay, so what else can we discuss? Giving? Sowing and reaping? I understand the point of your post, and the question's intent. Do you want a debate? I'm sure someone might play devil's advocate so you can get everything off your chest. lol

I haven't got anything on my chest other than the desire to follow God's word.

If you're looking for a debate, please go elsewhere.

If you're willing to increase my understanding of God's word by taking an understanding, empathetic approach and give clear answers, please stay.

Thank you

 

[posthuman]

i ♥ you Ben

 

[CharliRenee]

We don't have to but we get to...

 

[BenFTW]

I haven't got anything on my chest other than the desire to follow God's word.

If you're looking for a debate, please go elsewhere.

If you're willing to increase my understanding of God's word by taking an understanding, empathetic approach and give clear answers, please stay.

Thank you

Okay, I'm sorry if I'm being too blunt. Really. It felt like you literally ignored the answers provided, and kept trying to define the OP's question (which was already clear to begin with). We aren't under compulsion to give, God loves a cheerful giver. That is found in the scripture I provided to you earlier.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and act like you don't have an agenda here, and aren't looking for a debate.

 

[BenFTW]

We don't have to but we get to...

Most people debate 10%, (which was a bare minimum), then there is offerings (above the 10%). Its an interesting principle when you consider the verse that says to sow sparingly you'll reap sparingly, but if you sow bountifully you'll reap bountifully. A naturalistic perspective would think giving leads to loss, a subtraction from one's wealth. Yet, God has put in place laws, promises, or principles (what have you), that actually leads to multiplication.

 

[WalkingTree]

I care about the truth, less about how people feel.

Now there is an oxymoron, the truth is about caring for others above yourself.

Truth over feelings? And this is why we have snowflakes demanding that feelings and emotions = fact. Because others have tried to convince them that facts have nothing to do with their feelings. Especially when it comes to God.

 

[Lanolin]

There is no obligation that I can see.

If its not giving cheerfully, then its either extortion or becomes a duty i.e a work. Ive seen churches that claim if you dont give then you wont be blessed but one needs to be careful that you arent giving to the rich. And the thing with money, its not actually money that God want or needs. God would rather you give your coat, food, water to those needing these things not money to pay the bills. A lot of money to pay bills is just another way of taxing people and if theres anything people dont want to do is pay tax. Cos we know that its the tax collectors that take a cut for themselves, while the tax collectors dont pay a cent.


One might as well charge a door fee at church or operate a rent-a-pew and that is really what used to happen in some churches, plus paying for parking. And at the toilets pay to use toilet paper. Buy your own bible and each hymn costs $1. We know Jesus parents couldnt afford the sacrifice at his birth they got a turtledove instead of a lamb...and people on low incomes were really looked down on by temple authorities. Cos they didnt have much to give. The Pharisees were so proud they tithes even their mints and cumin. When Jesus predicted the temple would be destroyed he wasnt sad about it because he knew what a burden the upkeep of this building required...it crippled people so much to pay for the upkeep that was the downfall of the kingdom. When God was actually happy to be present in a tent!

Check out Proverbs 22:16

 

[Adam4Eve]

The answer I'm getting is a clear "no", in that OBLIGATED giving is NOT active under the new covenant.

So my next question: why do some churches teach that OBLIGATED giving (tithing) is still active now?

Are these churches manipulating people?
Do these churches know that in reality if people knew they had a choice then church bills might not be covered, and hence feed people a twisted view of scripture with survival in mind?
Does the pastoral 'society' know that if people chose not to give, there wouldn't be a (often very cosy) living to be made teaching scripture and pastors would have to get another job?


A note on terminology:

Tithing (giving 10% through obligation) is different from donating any amount through choice.
Don't mix up the terminology of tithing and donating.

 

[MattforJesus]

Straight question, straight answer...

Please tell me why, UNDER THE NEW COVENANT, Christians are OBLIGATED to give some of their income to the church.


If you think Christians are not obligated but that it's nice to contribute to your church, that's fine.
But that's not the question.

And remember, I'm asking about under the NEW covenant.

While people do debate about whether tithes, or not, or whether give to the Church, or not, one thing is for sure that the saints are to only go by their needs, and not their wants.

God only blesses us with our needs, and not our wants, and we have to help the poor, and needy if possible, and this is the law of God, and the operation of the Church.

Paul said charity, love in action, works, is greater than faith, and love works no ill towards their neighbor, therefore love is the fulfilling of the law, which includes caring about the poor, and needy.

Which Paul said if they do not have charity, then they are nothing, and they have erred from the faith, and the love of money is the root of all evil for it neglects the poor, and needy, which means they lack love.

James said if they do not have charity, then their faith is dead, and John said if they do not have charity, then the love of God does not dwell in them, so do not love in word, and in tongue, but in deed, works, and in truth.

The early Church sold all they had that was not a necessity, and distributed the money to the saints in need, and had all things common, which means they shared everything.

Paul said that he coveted no man's gold, and silver, money, but only his necessities as he traveled around preaching the Gospel.

So people can say why tithes, why give to the Church, when what does that mean if they can only go by their needs anyway, lest they think they do not like to give so they can have money for their wants.

For do they cry why give because they are struggling to make ends meet, or do they cry why give because they want to go by their wants, and want that new Playstation that came out with the new game that is all the rave.

Because I tend to think that a lot people cry about giving to the Church, not because they are struggling financially, but because they do not want to give money for they want to spend it on their wants.

But what do tithes, and giving to the Church mean, when you can only go by your needs, and not your wants, and have to care about the poor, and needy if possible.

For there is no money for you to enjoy on yourself anyway, and if you do go by your wants then you fall victim to the love of money is the root of all evil, for you care about your wants more than you love people, then how are you right with God when love is the fulfilling of the law.

 

[Adam4Eve]

While people do debate about whether tithes, or not, or whether give to the Church, or not, one thing is for sure that the saints are to only go by their needs, and not their wants.

God only blesses us with our needs, and not our wants, and we have to help the poor, and needy if possible, and this is the law of God, and the operation of the Church.

Paul said charity, love in action, works, is greater than faith, and love works no ill towards their neighbor, therefore love is the fulfilling of the law, which includes caring about the poor, and needy.

Which Paul said if they do not have charity, then they are nothing, and they have erred from the faith, and the love of money is the root of all evil for it neglects the poor, and needy, which means they lack love.

James said if they do not have charity, then their faith is dead, and John said if they do not have charity, then the love of God does not dwell in them, so do not love in word, and in tongue, but in deed, works, and in truth.

The early Church sold all they had that was not a necessity, and distributed the money to the saints in need, and had all things common, which means they shared everything.

Paul said that he coveted no man's gold, and silver, money, but only his necessities as he traveled around preaching the Gospel.

So people can say why tithes, why give to the Church, when what does that mean if they can only go by their needs anyway, lest they think they do not like to give so they can have money for their wants.

For do they cry why give because they are struggling to make ends meet, or do they cry why give because they want to go by their wants, and want that new Playstation that came out with the new game that is all the rave.

Because I tend to think that a lot people cry about giving to the Church, not because they are struggling financially, but because they do not want to give money for they want to spend it on their wants.

But what do tithes, and giving to the Church mean, when you can only go by your needs, and not your wants, and have to care about the poor, and needy if possible.

For there is no money for you to enjoy on yourself anyway, and if you do go by your wants then you fall victim to the love of money is the root of all evil, for you care about your wants more than you love people, then how are you right with God when love is the fulfilling of the law.

See post #50

 

[MattforJesus]

The answer I'm getting is a clear "no", in that OBLIGATED giving is NOT active under the new covenant.

So my next question: why do some churches teach that OBLIGATED giving (tithing) is still active now?

Are these churches manipulating people?
Do these churches know that in reality if people knew they had a choice then church bills might not be covered, and hence feed people a twisted view of scripture with survival in mind?
Does the pastoral 'society' know that if people chose not to give, there wouldn't be a (often very cosy) living to be made teaching scripture and pastors would have to get another job?


A note on terminology:

Tithing (giving 10% through obligation) is different from donating any amount through choice.
Don't mix up the terminology of tithing and donating.

There is a lot of preachers that like to preach give to the Church so they can live a comfortable, prosperous life, especially television evangelists.

Get in to contact with a preacher on television for help, and they most likely will respond asking for money, as if that is their concern more than the problem, or question you pose to them.

Their main concern seems to be money for themselves, before work of the ministry, with some being millionaires, and driving nice cars, and living in nice houses, and trying to convince the congregation they deserve that money, and prosperity, for they preach the Gospel.

But Paul said the preacher is not to be in the ministry for the money, and if they preach that God blesses with money for their wants withdraw yourselves from them, having food, and clothing be content, and God wants equality among the saints, so the preacher does not get blessed any more than any saint.

And the early Church sold all their possessions that was not a necessity, and laid the money at the apostles feet, which they did not use it for personal use, but distributed the money to the poor.

But many preachers use the money that is given for their own personal use, which is for the people so their needs are met, and some preachers, like again television evangelists, are living lavishly, even doling that money out to their children to live lavishly too, and neglecting the purpose of what the money is to be used for.

And this is strange concerning Africa, that there are preachers that are millionaires, taking advantage of the people, but you would think that in such a country that does not prosper like America, that they would have some kind of compassion upon the people, but people are the same all over the world, and the love of money the root of all evil, for it neglects the poor and needy.

It is true that many preachers take advantage of the congregation to cause money to flow in to their Church, so they can live lavishly, or at least have a very comfortable good lifestyle, all at the expense of the people, even taking advantage of old people, and the widows, the same as the Pharisees were doing.

So they probably know they do not have any backing for the preaching of tithes, but they do it anyway for it keeps the money flowing to them to prosper them.

 

[MattforJesus]

2Pe 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
2Pe 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

They make merchandise of the saints by saying God said give this, and some try to impose a certain amount that the congregation should give concerning offerings, which television evangelists like to do that, but God said whatever a person purposes in their own heart give that, so God left it up to the congregation, not a preacher telling them how much they should give.

In other words their concern is to try to extract money from the saints for they are covetous, and it appears as if it is more important to them then actually preaching the word of God for their spiritual benefit.

And it makes you think do some of them really believe the Bible, or did they find an easy way to make money.

 

[Adam4Eve]

The answer I'm getting is a clear "no", in that OBLIGATED giving is NOT active under the new covenant.

So my next question: why do some churches teach that OBLIGATED giving (tithing) is still active now?

Are these churches manipulating people?
Do these churches know that in reality if people knew they had a choice then church bills might not be covered, and hence feed people a twisted view of scripture with survival in mind?
Does the pastoral 'society' know that if people chose not to give, there wouldn't be a (often very cosy) living to be made teaching scripture and pastors would have to get another job?


A note on terminology:

Tithing (giving 10% through obligation) is different from donating any amount through choice.
Don't mix up the terminology of tithing and donating.

Anybody have any answers for post #50, quoted above?

 

[obedienttogod]

Does God supply all of our needs?
yes

Does God supply us with paying jobs?
yes

Does the building one attends church services in need electricity, running water, at times repair work done...and if the congregation outgrows the capacity of the building, does the building need to be expanded by adding on to it?
yes

Does the Pastor, who if is an actual true man of God (housing calls to go and pray for the sick, studying fervently to give his best while teaching/preaching representing an example of Christ, being a true shepherd to his flock) deserve to be compensated for his time, effort, example?
(technically no) the Gospel is free just like accepting God is free in monetary terms. Therefore, Salvation is free because Yeshua paid the price. But on the other hand, if the congregation works the pastor like a dog, compensation deserves to be rewarded. After all, the pastor should be the very example of God providing for His Elect, which is not based upon compensation. But technically, one could claim compensation is God providing for the pastor.

But the needs of the body should be first and foremost cared for. If you gather in a building, the building needs its essential necessities.

It really is a shame that donations come in labels (tithing-building fund-missionary-etc). It all goes to the treasurer, and then to the one or 2 bank accounts. And the typical board of trustee's, are those with the deepest pockets. So one could legally claim, the pastor is being bought off. It's just a mess how the church has become. It literally is a den of thieves, for the most part!!

 

[Nehemiah6]

Please tell me why, UNDER THE NEW COVENANT, Christians are OBLIGATED to give some of their income to the church.

Not obligated to but expected to. Because that is how the work of the Kingdom of God must proceed.

 

[tourist]

And there are many who go into the ministry seeking a paycheck, and become a hireling.

Not sure how many would go into the ministry for the money as some ministers don't even get paid or perhaps just a nominal sum at that. There are more lucrative jobs than ministers to consider. Financially, it doesn't make any sense at all.

 

[Adam4Eve]

Not obligated to but expected to. Because that is how the work of the Kingdom of God must proceed.

I'm afraid I disagree.

The kingdom of God does not necessarily proceed through financial giving to a Church, it proceeds through getting out there and having real conversations.
This costs nothing.

 

[tourist]

I'm afraid I disagree.

The kingdom of God does not necessarily proceed through financial giving to a Church, it proceeds through getting out there and having real conversations.
This costs nothing.

Regarding how the kingdom of God proceeds from conversation verses financial means, there is also as saying - talk is cheap.