In GOD We Trust?
Tithing is a much debated topic in the church. There are those who say it is required of Christians, while others state it is no longer relevant under grace. Certain preachers, who were once adamant advocates of the tithe, have now found themselves arguing against it, at least not in the requisite form. Is the evidence against the practice truly that persuasive? The canonized New Testament does spark thought on the matter when broached, even in its simplest and most straight forward form. Are Christians required to tithe?
A most misleading question, for the only thing Christians are required to do is faith continually in the verb sense. As the thief on the cross next to Jesus, one could go their entire life a highly functional sinner, but on their death bed they confess their faith in Jesus as the Christ, they’ll be saved absent any measure of church accepted conduct. Now, for the remainder, who come to Christ significantly earlier in our lives, should, which is a better and more responsible word, they tithe? With all precision, yes.
Many who disagree with such an answer will point to the absence of tithing in the New Testament with an emphasis on the lack of direct instruction by Paul or any other apostle placing the charge on the believer. Thus, they conclude, tithing is an Old Testament concept and confined to the Mosaic law. At the first, such reasoning can be convincing, however, such a view tends to overlook the following key elements comprising the custom.
The first definite mention of tithing, or at least the first usage of the words tithe and/or tenth, occurs when Abraham gives tithes to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18-20). Which was prior to God entering into covenant with Abraham in chapter 15 (Galatians 3:15-29). One must also note Jacob, who, following his now coined, Jacob’s ladder vision, vowed to tithe unto the Lord from all that God shall give unto him(Genesis 28:10-22). Simply because tithing is required by the law, that does not denote the idea that tithing is constricted to the law.
The New Testament is not as ambiguous on the subject as the “Old Testament concept” arguments portrays. Jesus is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek and as previously mentioned Abraham gave tithes to Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:1-10). Melchizedek’s identity is surrounded by much speculation. It is the position of the author to agree with Jasher 16:11-12, which concurs with Genesis 14:18-20, recognizing Melchizedek to be Shem. Also noting that in the book of Jasher, Adonizedek is used in place of Melchizedek. This would suggest the varying names are not names at all, but titles given to a man operating in a given office. An office believed to be held by Shem’s father, Noah, along with Methuselah, Enoch, going all the way back to Adam, who’s line was restarted with Seth, who took on the mantle since Cain, was cursed for killing Abel. If this explanation were accepted, then it would follow that Jesus’ priesthood is a continuation of the original priesthood bestowed on Adam and greater than the Levitical priesthood which came from Abraham, who even as the “Father of faith”, came from Shem. This would qualify Jesus’ priesthood as being greater than those from Abraham’s loins.
In appreciating the Melchizedekian priesthood and its operation before the law with Shem and after the law with Christ, how then can tithing be relegated to merely an Old Testament concept? Melchizedek’s only specified functions involved a form of communion and tithing. Hebrews states, “It is beyond dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. In the one case tithes are received by mortal men, but in the other case, by one of whom it is testified that he lives.” How then can we, as professors of this Great High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek, accept communion, but neglect the tithe? In submitting to the gestalt theory of learning, the relationships between these elements would fill in, by reasonable assumption, the significance of tithing to the New Testament believer. Yet, even assumption can be forgone by the edification of Hebrews 7:1-10.
Accepting Shem as Melchizedek substantiates the claim that those who are taught should tithe to those who teach them. Abraham was sent to live with Shem and Noah to learn the instruction of the Lord (Jasher 9:5-6). Abraham, in turn, sent Isaac to learn from Shem following Sarah’s death (Jasher 24:16-17), and Isaac taught these things to Jacob. A fact that would clarify both Abraham’s and Jacob’s familiarity with tithing. Paul speaks of this responsibility to the Corinthian church (1 Corinthians 9:1-15) and to his son in Christ, Timothy (1 Timothy 5:17-18). An aspect of doctrine that Paul admits withholding from the Corinthians and how doing so was a disservice. One could also speculate that this stanza may grant insight into why tithing is not more apparent in the epistles.
If all of these elements are true, then the answer remains yes, Christians should tithe. For the tithe is fundamental in their tangible honoring of Jesus, who is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek. A priesthood that cannot be distanced from tithing. Therefore, Jesus should then be synonymous with the act if the first portion of Hebrews 7 is to be fully embraced. By tithing we acknowledge the sovereignty of God, proving that all we have and will ever have comes from Him—the essence of our subsistence. As our current society is constructed, there is no other means apart from our purse to assess the tithe. As for the frequency, one would not find harm in reflecting on Jacob’s vow, “of all that You give me I will give a full tenth to You”. Now, the question is no longer, “Is tithing required of the Christian?” Rather, it should be, “If you are a Christian, why would you not tithe?”
