Pastor Ron Jones at the Immanuel Bible Church in Springfield, VA tried something very unusual this past Sunday. After preaching his sermon "WEALTH" from Mat 6:19-24, he called on his congregation to put what they heard into immediate action.
Pastor Jones called for everyone present to empty their pockets of all "cash and coin" and give it away before they left the building. Apparently the church collected the money from the people as they left the worship center.
According to Pastor Jones, over $33,000 in cold hard cash was collected. The funds were used to stroke three checks in excess of $11,000 to three worthy ministires outside of their church.
At his blog, Jones said that he was very pleased at the amount raised, but not surprised at the people's generosity. He said that the reaction was mixed...one member called it a "Sunday Morning Shakedown", but Jones preferred to call it a "Sunday Morning Shakeup". Jones said he went to lunch with one member this week who said he would have paid for the pastor's lunch, but he had no money in his pocket! Funny!
A couple of comments:
- one commenter on Jones' blog said it was a good lesson for his son to see his dad open his wallet and empty it at the request of the pastor. Are we sure that is a GOOD thing? [Update: after watching the sermon and how Jones explained why he was doing this, and what the money was going toward, I'm sure it was a good thing].
- here's a thought: I wonder what a mega church would do if their congregation one Sunday decided NOT to give their "tithes and offerings" to the church, but decided to give it DIRECTLY to a needy ministry in their home town that is caring for people's physical needs? Would the pastor like that? Or would he call out his church for their disobedience in not bringing the money to the "storehouse"?
What do you think of Pastor Jones' tactic? Would you have emptied your pockets? Was this a "shakedown" or a "shakeup"?
Here is Pastor Jones' sermon if interested:
45 comments:
Thanks "JT" for the tip on this story!
The question should not be what would the pastor think about it, the question should be what does the Bible have to say about it.
Jeff
That is not intended to be a Critique of the answer, but rather a redirecting of the question.
Just watched the sermon. Very good sermon on the connection between a person's pocketbook and their heart and spiritual condition.
Interesting, he actually does NOT believe the current economic crisis is a judgment of God for non-tithing Christians. At the start of his sermon he gave three reasons for the current deep economic recession: Excesses in the credit and housing markets, which were caused by 1. Bad financial legislation; 2. Greed on Wall Street; 3. Averge Americans over extending themselves financially (homes they couldn't afford). Wow, I thought that it was a judgment of God, God working behind the scenes to punish non-tithing Christians. Thanks Pastor Jones for clearing that up.
"I wonder what a mega church would do if their congregation one Sunday decided NOT to give their "tithes and offerings" to the church, but decided to give it DIRECTLY to a needy ministry in their home town that is caring for people's physical needs?"
Tithes are to be given to the storehouse - aka your local church membership.
Offerings can be given to any ministry as the giver sees fit.
"The question should not be what would the pastor think about it, the question should be what does the Bible have to say about it."
We know what scripture says about giving in the NC. (Even though some want to insist it teaches tithing, it does not. It teaches giving to your brothers and sisters in need which includes those taking the Gospel to the world.)
The question is..what is the Holy Spirit guiding you to do? But you have to be in constant prayer, studyand abiding in Christ to know. That is the whole point of sanctification.
Personally, I would not have opened my wallet. What I give to is between me and the Holy Spirit. I will answer for it. Not to a pastor or a church but to Jesus Christ. Sometimes what I am led to do does not even make sense to me but the Spirit makes it clear. Kind of like poor Ananias saying but he is persecuting us, Lord! But he obeyed and went to Saul.
The last person I would trust is the pastor and staff to decide for me.
But this is much better than storehouse tithing heresy and the false teaching that 10% makes you right with God. That just makes me want to weep when I hear such nonsense preached.
Matt
Tithes are to be given to the storehouse - aka your local church membership.
___________________________________
Really? Pass the kool-aid. Tithes were given in the old testament to the temple storehouse to the Levitical priests as part of the Mosaic law. You translate that to mean that now, we Christians, must give 10% of our paychecks to the budget of the church we go to? Wow.
You translate that to mean that now, we Christians, must give 10% of our paychecks to the budget of the church we go to? Wow.
January 13, 2010 7:40 PM
Which means they view the church building as the temple of God when scripture specifically tells us that NOW God resides in our hearts...if we are saved. We are the temple where God dwells. Not that building.
I don't like being put on the spot, as in asking me to empty my pockets in church to give to anything.
I would also like to know 'what' I was giving to prior to giving. I think that is being a wise steward. Blind giving is just being blind. Why not throw it into the wind and say that wherever it lands is designed by God to reach whoever He wants it to reach. It's not a sin to use your brain.
The Holy Spirit's leading, and reading the Pastor's heart and motive, those are also indicators for me to make a decision to give or not to give.
This obviously was not meant as a 10% giving, but was meant to be a 100% giving of what was on you at the time, sacrificial giving.
What if you had previous plans for the cash that you had on you? In answer to that, what if the cash was planned for feeding your family after church, gas for visiting your Mom in the nursing home that afternoon? I wonder if the peer pressure of emptying your pockets and then reserving some for your planned spending would cause either guilty feelings for not giving it all, or guilty feelings for giving it all and not being able to afford your previous planned spending. Just wondering...
I like the gesture as an object lesson, but I don't like being put on the spot. Again, I think God wants us to use our brain. I'm with Matt on this one.
I vote shakedown.
Hebrews 7:8 (KJV)
And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
here = in the Levitical priesthood.
there = in the priesthood after the order of Melchisedec. In order to bring out the typical parallel more strongly, Paul substitutes, "He of whom it is witnessed that he liveth," for the more untypical, "He who is made like to Him that liveth." Melchisedec "liveth" merely in his official capacity, his priesthood being continued in Christ. Christ, on the other hand, is, in His own person, "ever living after the power of an endless life" (Hebrews 7:16, 25). Melchisedec's death not being recorded, is expressed by the positive term "liveth," for the sake of bringing into prominence the antitype, Christ, of whom alone it is strictly and perfectly true, "that He liveth."
tithes = dekate, dek-at'-ay; feminine of Greek (dekatos); a tenth, i.e. as a percentage or (technical) tithe :- tenth (part), tithe.
The unknown author of Hebrews seems to be clearly saying that Christ is still in the business of receiving tithes.
Interesting... any other interpretations?
A few observations:
1. Pastor seems like a nice guy.
2. No problem giving to ministries outside the church.
3. I disagree with decisions being made like this. Although it may not have been intended by the pastor, to me this is very manipulative. It's no different (in practice, maybe not in intent) than a persuasive pastor with lots of personality giving a great speech on a piece of business and then asking everyone to stand - and then asking everyone who agrees with him to sit down.
4. Compassion and deliberation are not mutually exclusive.
5. I would like to know if the church voted to support these ministries by previous action or did the pastor pick the ministries that he wanted to send the checks to?
6. At a local church here in town something similar happened one Sunday. The pastor preached about all the people in Africa who had no shoes and at the end of the sermon, everyone was encouraged to put his or her shoes in a box as they left so that they could be sent to Africa. Everyone complied. I have always wondered if those shoes made it to Africa, and if they did, were they useful? I can imagine some man on the Sahara being given a size 11 pair of Allen Edmonds cap toe laceups. Would he wear them, or cut them up and use the leather and other parts for something else. Or a woman receiving a pair of high healed open toe shoes. Do those work in Africa? I guess it depends.
I hope that the church that I mentioned above never has a sermon preached about how there are not enough brassieres in Africa...
I guess someone in the emergent church will do that sermon.
What was it I said about compassion and deliberation?
At any rate, I appreciate the sentiment behind giving and the connection to the heart.
I just believe that the approach was off.
Louis
"In answer to that, what if the cash was planned for feeding your family after church, gas for visiting your Mom in the nursing home that afternoon? I wonder if the peer pressure of emptying your pockets and then reserving some for your planned spending would cause either guilty feelings for not giving it all, or guilty feelings for giving it all and not being able to afford your previous planned spending. "
I agree with this point. The money in your pocket might have been designated by the Holy spirit for something else thatone had prayed and responded to a conviction. That person would have to decline to participate in front of others knowing he was obeying God not man but sending the message to others he was not because they believe what the pastor did was from God.
I am also concerned that what this pastor did violates the spirit of Matthew 6
What is missing from all of this is the fact that our faith is very intimate with out Savior. We can decide as a Body to take up collections for something specific (re: Corinthians) and prepare for it with prayer, etc. This is too much of a "show" for my taste.
Matt
"The unknown author of Hebrews seems to be clearly saying that Christ is still in the business of receiving tithes."
One or Three?
As Hank Hanegraaff says: judge what is cloudy in light of what is clear. Please explain how you harmonize your interpretation of Hebrews 7: 8 with II Corinthians 9: 6-7.
Hebrews 7:8 (KJV)
And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
here = in the Levitical priesthood.
there = in the priesthood after the order of Melchisedec. In order to bring out the typical parallel more strongly, Paul substitutes, "He of whom it is witnessed that he liveth," for the more untypical, "He who is made like to Him that liveth." Melchisedec "liveth" merely in his official capacity, his priesthood being continued in Christ. Christ, on the other hand, is, in His own person, "ever living after the power of an endless life" (Hebrews 7:16, 25). Melchisedec's death not being recorded, is expressed by the positive term "liveth," for the sake of bringing into prominence the antitype, Christ, of whom alone it is strictly and perfectly true, "that He liveth."
tithes = dekate, dek-at'-ay; feminine of Greek (dekatos); a tenth, i.e. as a percentage or (technical) tithe :- tenth (part), tithe.
The unknown author of Hebrews seems to be clearly saying that Christ is still in the business of receiving tithes.
Interesting... any other interpretations?
January 14, 2010 9:17 AM
Remember who Hebrews was written for. The Jews who became believers. Read it in that context.
The author is comparing the OC with the NC and that we have a much closer and bette relationship to God because of Jesus Christ than those under the law of Moses.
The discussion of tithing in Hebrews chapter 7 was only included to prove that the priesthood of Melchizedek was superior to the Levitical priesthood. By proving that point the writer would also prove that Jesus is superior to the priests of the Old Covenant because Psalm 110:4 had prophesied that he would be a priest forever, “after the order of Melchizedek.” That was the ultimate purpose of the argument, to prove that Jesus was greater than the Old Covenant priests.
Tithing is part of the comparison and the argument because the tribe of Levi was symbolically in the loins of their great-grandfather Abraham when he met Melchiz-edek and gave him a tithe. Therefore it can be said that Levi paid a tithe to Melchizedek and received a blessing from him. Paying the tithe to Melchizedek and receiving the blessing from him are both considered by the writer of Hebrews to be proof that Melchizedek was greater than Levi and all the Old Covenant priests, which came from the tribe of Levi. (Heb. 7:1–17)
The priesthood of Melchizedek can also be considered greater than the Old Covenant priesthood because Melchizedek was a king and a priest and the Levitical priesthood was forbidden to hold the office of king. Furthermore, under the Law of Moses there was a constant succession of priests as men would die and be replaced. The priesthood of Melchizedek can also be considered superior to this aspect of the Levitical priesthood due to the fact that there is no Biblical reference to his birth or death or being replaced by any other after him.
This passage is NOT teaching tithing for the NC and if interpreted that way completely changes the meaning and is ADDING to the Word. BEWARE!
Hebrews 7:8 has been taken out of context and misinterpreted. It is erroneously considered by some to be teaching that tithing is the customary way of giving in the New Covenant. This passage of scripture is part of a weighty and complex theological argument. The casual reader may not comprehend its meaning. It requires a careful study of the whole passage, verse by verse and word by word, to get a clear understanding of what is being said.
Matt
It helps to look at Greek grammar....
Hebrews 7:8 in the King James Version you used reads:
And here men that die receive tithes; but there he receiveth them, of whom it is witnessed that he liveth.
This verse is absolutely not saying that the practice of tithing was being followed by the New Testament church at the time the book of Hebrews was written.
It is also not talking about a practice of tithing that is supposed to be in effect permanently, throughout the church age. The phrase “here men that die receive tithes” is not talking about Christian ministers in the church, now or then. It is talking about priests at the temple in Jerusalem. The “he” that is being referred to by the phrase “but there he receiveth them” is Melchizedek, 4000 years ago, not Jesus.
You do understand that when Hebrews was written there were STILL Levite priests currently collecting tithes down the street in the temple?
Here is a better translation from the Amp:
Furthermore, here [in the Levitical priesthood] tithes are received by men who are subject to death; while there [in the case of Melchizedek], they are received by one of whom it is testified that he lives [perpetually]. (The Amplified Bible. Copyright © Zondervan Publishing House 1965)
Matt
PS: I beg you to be very careful about ADDING Laws to the NC that are not there in your interpretations. It is serious business.
A few things to keep in mind when reading Hebrews that will help:
1. It was written almost for sure before AD 70. It does not mention the destruction of the Temple but mentions persecution and the promise of worse persecution to come. These 'Jewish Christians" were most likely being persecuted from both the Jewish leaders and Romans. (We know this from secular history)
2. The author quotes the Septuagint. Many NT authors quote the Septuagint. This is significant in the NT as you have Jews quoting the Greek translation. Jesus quoted from it.
3. A problem we see throughout the NT letters are Jewish Christians expecting folks to convert to Judaism FIRST to be Christians. Paul refers to this all the time. This author is telling them to just hold fast to their confession.
4. Always keep in mind the context and reason for Hebrews to have been written. It was NOT written to or for Gentiles or a general audience.... although we glean much from it proving WHO Jesus Christ IS and the glories of the New Covenant.
Matt
One last thing folks need to understand about Melchiz-edek, Abraham and 10% .
This was from the spoils of war.
Matt
"Remember who Hebrews was written for. The Jews who became believers. Read it in that context. "
Thanks for saying this. I have never liked Hebrews and now I can dismiss it because it is not for me.
Here's another question for the storehouse tithers. Why is God punishing America financially right now? The average Christian hasn't given 10% to the church for decades. So, why was the economy doing so great in the 80's and 90's when Christians weren't giving 10% back then either? I'm not seeing a cause and effect here.
Here's another question for the storehouse tithers. Why is God punishing America financially right now? The average Christian hasn't given 10% to the church for decades. So, why was the economy doing so great in the 80's and 90's when Christians weren't giving 10% back then either? I'm not seeing a cause and effect here.
January 14, 2010 3:21 PM
You would need to ask those who say God is punishing America because of this. Has anyone on this site made that claim?
The subject of the site made that claim.
Louis,
Good points at 10:21 a.m. I remember the shoe story and thought the same thing. I think it was during the summer, and I could just envision all those barefooted people running across the hot parking lot to get to their cars... owww... owww... owww!
"I hope that the church that I mentioned above never has a sermon preached about how there are not enough brassieres in Africa... "
Well, if one ever perused a copy of National Geographic one might conclude that.
Look, we've seen a toilet used as a pulpit (Ed Young, the younger)... a bed on the platform accompanied by a graphic sex sermon (an oxymoron, I know), cussing from the pulpit... so it wouldn't surprise me at all to see some idiot come up with a gimmick like this if they think it will bring in more nickels and noses. You should copyright that now.
"Remember who Hebrews was written for. The Jews who became believers. Read it in that context. "
Thanks for saying this. I have never liked Hebrews and now I can dismiss it because it is not for me.
January 14, 2010 1:50 PM
Then you have to dismiss all the other letters, too. Most are to specific churches or specific people like Timothy or Titus.
I kinda figured someone would try and twist that around. But then I thought most would too intelligent and realize that all the Epistles are written to a specific audience. The content still teaches us today. But understanding the audience and the time period is part of basic hermeneutics.
Otherwise, you should greet your brothers with a holy kiss and take a little wine for your stomach. (wink)
Matt
Matt,
What is the relevance to us if it is only a history lesson?
"The unknown author of Hebrews seems to be clearly saying that Christ is still in the business of receiving tithes."
___________________________________
He is? Okay. So who do I make my check to? Don't tell me...wait for it...I bet it goes to "First Baptist Church of Jacksonville, Inc." doesn't it. Undesignated? Especially if I attend there and enjoy the music and sermons, right? No way would the money "Christ is still in the business of collecting" would go to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, or help his loved ones in need? Right. It HAS to go to the church where I can sit and be blessed? I just knew it. Thanks for the greek lesson to show me that.
Matt,
What is the relevance to us if it is only a history lesson?
___________________________________
Are you talking about Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,...need I go on. Slaves obey your masters is NEW testament isn't it? If Christ wanted to free the slaves he could have done it right? And women are not to adorn themselves and should be silent right? I could go on and on. But I think you see how ridiculous your attempted point might be. Or am I missing it? Are you really arguing that any history in the Bible regarding the Jewish nation and their laws applies to us Christians now? Or is that the only argument you are forced into to try and defend your indefensible twisting of the scripture?
Sell that to your Kool-aid drinking flock. It won't hunt here.
The content still teaches us today. But understanding the audience and the time period is part of basic hermeneutics.
___________________________________
Amen Matt! These charlatans are quick to say the same thing when it suits them. They tell us how "clear" the Scripture is when it says what they want, then they trot out the greek when what it "clearly says" does not suit them. We must rely on them to tell us which parts mean what they say, and which parts you have to look at in context.
But, surprise surprise, only they can know the difference.
Isn't it odd that the "authority person" uses a dead language to make their points. Its "Greek" to me and to most everyone else. That is the reason they keep referring to the Greek. They know whats in the English and they are terrified, horrified, and just plain scared to death to use it. Oh, they will say pick up your copy of God's Word but in their strategy they will never say the English is completely 100% correct. They and only they are 100% correct in their understanding of the Greek. Sheeeeeeeeeee, give me a break.
Arn't you glad the written Word says to study to show thyself approved of God. Not some other authority!!!!
What is the relevance to us if it is only a history lesson?
January 14, 2010 5:38 PM
That is a clever comeback except that all Bible scholars use a mix of history, grammar, linguistics and audience at the time for interpretation. I am not suggesting anything new.
So, if nothing is cultural or historical, you should be greeting your brothers with a Holy kiss and taking some wine for your stomach when it is upset.
The key is that the Holy Spirit interprets for us if we are abiding in Him.
If I took your argument seriously and ignored the context for Hebrews of contrasting the Old and New Covenants to prove our Messiah as the High Priest, you would be actually saying that the author was commanding a tithe only
on Hebrew Christians. But it would require they give it to the Levite Priest. And that cannot be true.
Matt
Matt,
So what is the relevance of Hebrews 7:8? What is the relevance of Malachi 3:10? What is the relevance of Leviticus 27:30 to the point of if the tithe is holy, why would we want to be involved in something less than holiness?
I figured out why so many of you do not like the tithe,...
It takes away from your drinking fund!
So what is the relevance of Hebrews 7:8? What is the relevance of Malachi 3:10? What is the relevance of Leviticus 27:30 to the point of if the tithe is holy, why would we want to be involved in something less than holiness?
January 15, 2010 7:35 PM
Friend, I explained what the author of Hebrews was doing in a very lengthy comment. The author is talking to Jewish believers and comparing the Old and New Covenants. The whole point of Hebrews is to prove Jesus Christ as the High Priest forever and we are STILL saved by Faith in believing Jesus Christ as Messiah and not the Law.
You are proof texting and taking the meaning OUT of the context.
The other verses you mention are the Old Covenant when the tithe was enforced. The 'tithe' is not Holy in the New Covenant because it is not part of the New Covenant.
The Temple veil was torn in two on the Cross. Please study what that signifies. The tithe was taken to the Temple and presented to the Levite Priest...of which only a few were allowed in the Holy of Holies.
(Keep in mind only the tribe of Levi could be priests and even then they could not have any deformities or sores on their body. How do you transfer THAT to the New Covenant and making the pastor a sort of Levite Priest for the tithe?)
That 'curtain' or veil was torn in two on the Cross and the Holy of Holies now resides in OUR Temples if we are saved. Our Temples are our bodies. That is where God resides in the form of the Holy Spirit...which fits into all this because ONLY after Jesus Christ ascended to Heaven could He send the Holy Spirit to dwell in us.
If you read the passages on the Last Supper, you will see Jesus Christ talking about the New Covenant. (Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22)
My guess is that the jaws of the disciples dropped KNOWING what that signified but no really comprehending everthing it entailed. They had been taught about this all their lives and were expecting political delieverance because they were supposed to be a Theocracy.
When Jesus Christ spoke of the NC,
The Disciples would have been thinking of the promise in Jeremiah 31 which is quoted in Hebrews 8!
Look at Hebrews 8:13. It is very important within the context of what is being explained to this Hebrew audience.
They were going to be delivered out from the yoke of the Levite Priests, the Pharisees, etc.
Your understanding must start with the Law. Do you understand the purpose of the Law? If you can understand that, you will see that to impose the Law when it SHOULD be that our hearts are changed is to miss the whole meaning of the New Covenant.
Think of it, Abraham was 'saved' by Faith. The author of Hebrews is making a very important distinction for a reason when he mentions Noah, Abel, Enoch, Moses, etc in chapter 11.
Look at Heb 11:
39 And all these, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, 40 God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us.
NO ONE in the Old Covenant was saved by the law. So, what was the purpose of the Law?
The bottomline is that Jesus Christ RAISED THE BAR from OC tithing. Now the spirit of the law in our hearts is: If your brother is in need, sell all possessions and help him.
Just as He raised the bar on murder and adultery to anger and lust.
Matt
PS: I understand that you really do not want to understand. If you think long and hard about this, you might someday realize as I did that it would be easier to live under the law because NOW the requirement is a transformed heart which means we must fight the flesh daily.
We are given a foreshadowing of this in Ezekial 36. The OC points to Messiah.
Matt
Friend, I leave you with one last piece of advice I took seriously from Greg Koukle:
NEVER READ A BIBLE VERSE
Read the entire book of the Bible in order to really understand that ONE verse or passage. Even then the entire book is in context of the it's Covenant and that is in context of the entire Canon.
Taken out of it's context, it can mean just about anything and we see that happen all the time. It is one reason our churches have a form of godliness with NO power of the Holy Spirit on them.
This is why I prefer pastors who exposit whole books even if it takes years to do. But they are a rarity. It is much easier to catch error when the teacher exposits.
You have to do it yourself with the Holy Spirit illuminating truth. Study to show yourselves approved.
Even then, there are many things we might not understand in entirety such as the unpardonable sin, the entire doctrine of sin, etc.
Matt
Matt: "Pastors that exposit entire books"... This is the way Dr. Lindsay preached. He preached IN context and preached VERSE BY VERSE the entire book. Instead of the shoot from the hip, history lessons, and entertainment side shows that are so prevalent in some churches today.
Matt: "Pastors that exposit entire books"... This is the way Dr. Lindsay preached. He preached IN context and preached VERSE BY VERSE the entire book. Instead of the shoot from the hip, history lessons, and entertainment side shows that are so prevalent in some churches today.
And He preached storehouse tithing.
And He preached storehouse tithing.
January 18, 2010 1:45 PM
As do thousands of pastors. For a thousand years they also taught transubstantiation. Yes, even Protestants. Then they also taught the sacral system. Again, most taught infant Baptism except a very tiny minority throughout history and until the Seperatists came to America and grew in number.
Then we had many Protestants teaching, writing and preaching that slavery is instituted by God. This is how the SBC got started!
What does any of this do with the fact that none of the above is biblical?
Lindsay was a decent man who erred on teaching the tithe.
If anything, it should teach us to stop only learning from humans. To study on our own in prayer. It is the only way to recognize error and grow in Holiness.
There are no great men of God. Always remember that. Just depraved sinners saved by grace and that includes your favorite pastor.
There is way too much idolatry of leaders going on in the church. And it is getting worse. I follow Paul, I Apollos. Do you all realize that Paul was rebuking them for this?
It is crushing when you find someone you wholly admired was wrong on an important doctrine. But it should not be that way. We are dealing with humans. Not a professional class of specially anointed clergy. There is no such thing in the Body of Christ.
Follow Christ. Not man.
Matt
If anything, it should teach us to stop only learning from humans. To study on our own in prayer. It is the only way to recognize error and grow in Holiness.
Here is where your problem lies. You are asking me to take your word on how you interpret scripture. You are asking me to not believe what the Holy Spirit has shown us. You have questioned my study habits and ability to interpret scripture. You have made it known, you are right, I am wrong.
Maybe we need to ask, is this an primary issue which should bring division or a secondary one where differing interpretations are possible.
I have posted nothing to question you are wrong or right. I have posted scripture, with no interpretation but to let the words speak for themselves and I have been told I need to keep things in context.
Yes, some have given their positions and fought others on the topic, not I.
I have asked for you to show relevance and don't think you did... no problem you responded as you chose. I did not complain.
Thank you for being human and helping us all recognize that we all are.
"Here is where your problem lies. You are asking me to take your word on how you interpret scripture."
You have me all wrong, friend. You would be nuts to take my interpretation on anything. Same with your pastor. If saved, we are all called to be 'ministers' and are all priests in the Holy Priesthood.
" You are asking me to not believe what the Holy Spirit has shown us. You have questioned my study habits and ability to interpret scripture. You have made it known, you are right, I am wrong."
I simply believe you do not understand the Covenants and if you are the same commenter, you proof texted Hebrews. I simply encourage you to check out what I wrote.
Sometimes letting go of a pet doctrine is hard because we do not want to admit we have been wrong. It is embarassing. I have been there, done that, trust me.
"Maybe we need to ask, is this an primary issue which should bring division or a secondary one where differing interpretations are possible."
That depends on HOW it is taught. Mac is making it a primary doctrine and tying it to obeying God. One could be in great sin for only giving 10% and not listening to the Holy Spirit. One could be in great sin for giving 20% to a church and not a brother in need if they are not seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit but obeying the pastor instead. There is no 'one size fits all' for giving in the NC.
(Do you realize that part of the Tithe system was for poor people who did not have to pay but were charity cases? So now what about obeying God with a NT tithe of 10%?)
"I have posted nothing to question you are wrong or right. I have posted scripture, with no interpretation but to let the words speak for themselves and I have been told I need to keep things in context."
Are you the Hebrews 7 guy? If you are, you are not the first guy to take it out of context to preach a tithe.
"I have asked for you to show relevance and don't think you did... no problem you responded as you chose. I did not complain."
My goodness, I thought I gave a lot of information that can be verified by study. B ut it will take time and understanding the Covenants and going back into the OT will be necessary. Most Baptists are dispys and have not been taught about the Covenants properly. I am one of them.
cont
"Thank you for being human and helping us all recognize that we all are."
Never said I wasn't. but then, I do not receive my income from preaching a 'tithe', either. That would make me suspect if I did and preached a 'tithe' to obey God. It means I would be asking folks to obey me. Dangerous stuff.
I am asking folks to do what the NT church did and look around you for those brothers and sisters in need and help them. We don't need more highly paid pastors or big fancy buildings. We don't need new carpet or better sound systems. We need to minister to the Body in both word and deed.
Did it ever occur to you that giving 10% of your income to a needy single mom might be more Holy than putting it in some non existent 'storehouse'? It wish it had occured to me sooner.
I understand that this is a huge paradigm shift than what you have believed all your life. Many of us have been there. It is much easier to give a flat 10% and be done with it than seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit daily on giving.
Tell me, what do you think they did with 'tithe' in the NT? Remodel Lydia's house for a church? Pay those who were teaching? Pay some guy to play the lyre when they met?
What happened with the money in Acts? It was redistributed among the believers to those who were in need. Paul made tents so as not to be a burden. There was no storehouse in the NT church. Unless Lydia or Gaius had a special room built. (wink)
That was down the street at the Temple. And there was no Theocracy to support, either.
But there were plenty of Jewish believers who still wanted Gentile believers to be circumsized. That is what it sounds like when they preach Storehouse tithing.
It is Pharisetical
Matt
Matt: JLE is Jon L. Estes. He is a pastor.
Matt: JLE is Jon L. Estes. He is a pastor.
January 18, 2010 8:46 PM
If pastors did not depend on a 'tithe' for their income, it would free them up to teach giving as represented in the New Covenant to brothers and sisters in need as we see modeled in the NT Body.
Matt
Amen, Matt. You are so on target with your last posts.
I didn't know Jack Del Rio was pastoring, I thought he was coach of the Jaguars
Yes, and we all believed the earth was flat until 1492!!!
Post a Comment