This post started because my friend Jesse Phillips tweeted an intriguing thought, he said, "I'm sorry, tithing to support a building & paid staff simply is not Biblically mandated. Otherwise Paul, Peter & Jesus were way off."
I would have to say that Jesse is 100% correct. This speaks to a bigger issue of the separation of the law and what Jesus brought when He came to earth. In my studies of tithing, I wanted to prove that it was Biblical because so many churches have taught that you should give 10%, every week, without fail. The argument becomes obtuse when people start to ask whether you should give 10% before taxes or after taxes.
During a church service, the question came up about what happened if you couldn't tithe; the pastor explained that he would actually keep a record of the times he missed and try to pay it back in full. I couldn't believe this, much less find this reasoning in the Bible. That the God who is merciful but just would lay a burden of debt on us simply because we didn't have the money to give to the church that week? That seems to be a little ri...
However, having a spirit of giving cultivates others to do the same and gives God room to supply other needs. Ministers need to learn to be content with what they have and learn to follow the budget set for them with accountability. The way you handle money can have an impact on your personal integrity, and how the leadership in the church respects you and your ability to make decisions. Fagerstrom listed some helpful tips on how to gain respect from the church leadership in regards to money: Communicate with someone in leadership before making a big purchase, regularly ask the treasurer for updated records on your balance, make requests far in advance, pray about money, try to seek the best prices, apologize immediately if a purchase is too big or goes over the allotted budget, and never have surprise expenditures (Fagerstrom
Law 21, “If a man has broken through the wall (to rob) a house, they shall put him to death and pierce him, or hang him in the hole in the wall that he made.” (Doc D) This is just because with this when people see a dead man hanging then it would tell them not to rob a house or someone else's property. Law 48 “If a man has borrowed money to plant money to plant his field and a storm has flooded his field or carried away the crop,.... in that year he does not have to pay the creditor.” (Doc D)This is fair because he did not wash away the crops. If they had to pay the creditor then they would be giving them free money. the reason why they would be giving them free money is because the farmer did not wash away their crops mother nature
“But you must admit, Pastor, that not every decree in the Bible makes sense in this day and age.” “Only because you [Moretti] are taking the verses out of historical context-“ “Mr. Lincoln,” Angela Moretti says flatly. “You did first.” (Sing You Home p.388)
From my reading of Galatians, I would say that we should not follow the Jewish Law. If the Jewish law were the only way a person can be saved, then there would be no need for Jesus’s death. The apostle Paul also noticed this error because he tells the readers that because of his new understanding of the Law, he has come to reject the Law (Galatians 2:19). The Law is not the “end-all-be-all”, it is simply a filler until Jesus. Before the time of Jesus, people needed a moral code to live by, but they have a new Law to follow: the teachings of Jesus Christ!
Henry Hazlitt states, “The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups” (Hazlitt, 1979, p. 17). Leviticus 19:35-37 compels, “You shall do no wrong in judgment, in measurement of weight, or capacity. You shall have just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin: I am the Lord your God, who brought you out from the land of Egypt. You shall thus observe all My statutes, and all My ordinances, and do them: I am the Lord.” According to Proverbs 22:7, people will always be slaves to the lender as demonstrated by the Federal Reserve System violating Biblical values in economic
People paid 10% of what they earned in a year to the Church. This tax was called tithes. Tithes could either be paid in money or in goods produced by poor peasant farmers. Since peasants were very poor, they virtually always had to pay in seeds, grain or parts of animals. This usually caused peasants a lot of trouble because they needed the seeds to plant crops the following year. The church was so wealthy that it took these tithes from peasants and put them in large barns. The barns food would usually be invaded by rats and other animals that would eat the seeds, or the seeds/goods would simply rot. This truly shows the power and wealth of the Roman Catholic Church. The people were almost forced to play these tithes because if they did not pay them, there were huge consequences. The peasants could either get punished on earth by the church, or go to hell after
"In the Old Testament, it was every seven years, debts will be forgiven regardless of circumstance," Sponaugle said, referencing the civil laws noted in the Book of Deuteronomy.
The Old Testament law is seen as irrelevant by most modern Christians today. Christians are now under the blood of Jesus Christ which is said to abrogate the Law. Galatians 6:2 says, “Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ.” The law of Christ is to love God and your neighbor as yourself. This does not mean, however, that the Old Testament Law does not apply to Christians today. Author J. Daniel Hays expounds on this topic in his article, “Applying the Old Testament Law Today,” and focuses on the hermeneutical approach of Principlism. This approach allows the Old Testament Law to be viewed in light of the New Testament.
...alem during a time of crisis and keep it from the destruction during Scennacherib's siege. Although initially disguised as a religious reform, one can argue that Hezekiah's reinstatement of the tithe described in the Book of Chronicles (i.e., 2 Chronicles 31: 4-12) was actually Hezekiah's ploy to accumulate a stock pile of supplies to ensure that Jerusalem would withstand a potential siege. Although tithes of resources were also seen in ancient times, the biblical tradition states that the accumulated resources given by the people of Jerusalem were not sacrificed for to Yahweh but instead stored within the temple's store houses (2 Chronicles 31: 9-12). For this reason, it is possible that the nature of this reform was in fact secular in nature instead of a purely religious reforms because Hezekiah may have been planning to use these resources in a time of need.
wouldn't be in the Bible. If God wanted us to live by his rules, why
This last passage shows that God clearly does not support bribing because it is unrighteous and sinful. In all of these passages, the word “bribe” is not used in a positive context, and therefore shows that it should not be part of a judge’s character to take bribes and show unrighteousness. 2.
“He must not take many wive,s or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.” ( Duet. 17:17 KJV)
Unfortunately for Christians, there is actually very little law in the Bible -- either Old Testament or New -- that is original. Consider the Torah of the ancient Jews. The laws of the Babylonians, Assyrians, Sumerians, Hammurapi, Eshnunna, Hittites, Mishnah, and Israelites all bear a striking resemblance to each other, due to widespread copying of laws. Shared social norms produced identical laws against sorcery, kidnapping, sale of an abducted person, false witness, business dishonesty, bribing judges, property right violations, shutting off irrigation canals used by others, etc. The complete list of identical laws and customs is quite extensive. & nbsp; Nor is the New Testament's approach to the law unique.
Throughout the story the mother of Paul speaks about not having enough money to be where they want to be financially. They have more than enough money for compared to an average family, but they want more and more. Paul attempts to solve this issue by winning bets and giving his mother money secretly, in hope the voices would go away. The boy would hear the house ecko, “There must be more money, there must be more money, there must be more money!” (Page 1248)The parents obviously cared substantially about their social status and would prefer to not live a normal life and live well with access money, but rather, a luxurious on that can not be paid
The writer of this passage was Luke and he had many reasons for writing about this, but it was not as an endorsement of a type of communal living to be considered normative for the Christian church was not one of those reasons. A reason Luke wrote this passage was to express how the apostles and the rest of the church had differed greatly in their giving compared to the way Ananias and Sapphira did in their giving. Ananias and Sapphira were giving selfishly by only giving part of the money they had received from selling their land, while the apostles and the rest of the church were giving generously by giving all the money they had. “That is, they f...