TITHES AND OFFERINGS: HOW MUCH?

For many Christians, this is the sticking issue. They want to know exactly how much they owe to God so that they can then freely consider the rest as belonging to them to do with as they please. This, of course, speaks to one's attitude in giving more than to how much to give. But still, we would like to have at least a rough guideline to go by. Unfortunately, as in many other items relating to current church practices, there appear to be many biblical models we could swear by.

Maximalist Approach

Dealing first with some extreme views, on the one hand there is Jesus' reply to the rich young man as to what he needed to do in order to enter heaven. Jesus tells him to sell all of his goods and give them to the poor and follow Him. (Luke 18:18) We could then couple it with the example in Acts 4:32 describing the members of the early church holding all things in common with no one claiming private ownership of their goods. Then according to this biblical model, there is no question of tithing or giving – it should all be given to God. In addition to some obvious impracticalities to that approach, there are also a few caveats concerning that sort of interpretation:

1. Elsewhere in Luke (10:25), a lawyer comes to Jesus wanting to test him, and he asks the very same question. However, in that case Jesus tells him to love God and neighbor, then following it up with a telling of the Parable of the Good Samaritan as an example. So it is obvious that in each case, Jesus could discern the questioners' hearts and put his finger on exactly what was lacking in their individual lives. So we can't take Luke 18:18 as a universal model.

2. Concerning the example in Acts 4:32, so-called Christian communism, there are a few problems taking it at its face value also, besides the fact that descriptions in Acts do not always equate with prescriptions for today's church. For one thing, right after that passage we see the sad case of Ananias and Sapphira who gave to the apostles part of the proceeds from the sale of some of their property while stating that they had given all of it. Peter makes it very clear to Ananias in Acts 5:4 that the land was wholly his own to do with as he pleased, as were the proceeds of the sale. The sin was in lying about what he had done. We could add the example of John Mark's mother who obviously continued to own her own house in Acts 12, and used it on occasion to host the apostles.

Minimalist Approach

At the other extreme of the spectrum are those Christians who appear to look for loopholes to escape even the requirement of a tithe with arguments such as:

    1.The OT tithe was supposed to go to the temple to support the poor. Today our government taxes accomplish the same thing.

    2. If tithing is required for Christians today, why doesn't Jesus have more to say on that subject?

    3. In any case, we are living in the age of grace, not under the law. Thus, all the OT regulations were set aside for Christians.

    4. Look at the example of those Jerusalem Christians who practiced communism. It resulted in a lot of freeloaders and was the cause of the church being so poor that the Gentile churches founded by Paul had to bail them out by taking up a special offering.

    5. And even in the Gentile churches, there were many people who gave up enough of their money that the wealthier members had to support them. So Paul had to tell them to get off their backs and get back to work or there would be no more handouts (II Thessalonians 3:10-12).

I will not spend time rebutting each of these arguments, but if you are curious as to why none of them is particularly persuasive, send me an email (elmerphd21@hotmail.com) and I will try to explain. But briefly put, I think it is fair to say that while the NT has virtually nothing to say specifically regarding the requirement of tithing, it is certainly not because Jesus felt the whole subject of money was inconsequential. Instead, it appears to fit in with his approach to the Law in general – concentration on the heart of the matter, not the externals.

Tithing as a Good Guideline for Giving

There are actually minimalist and maximalist approaches even within the general category of tithing. But since each of these various views centers around the biblical principle of 10% giving, all of them do have a certain degree of validity to them. For one thing, note that Jesus when talking about the hypocritical religious leaders who tithed mint and cumin, did not tell them to discontinue the practice, only to couple it with the weightier matters of justice and mercy (Matthew 23:23). So at least at that time, he taught that the tithe was still necessary.

But if the tithe is still required for us, exactly what should we tithe? After all, back in the time of a primarily agrarian society it made perfect sense to to define tithes and offerings in terms of animals and produce. But today, our paycheck comes complete with deductions for Social Security, federal and state taxes, and savings taken out. Do we tithe on the gross or the net proceeds? And what about those who are retired? Does one pay on the interest one gets from investments and Social Security benefits, or is that “double-dipping” since one has perhaps already a paid a tithe on that money set aside earlier?

Does the bad example of the hypocrites in Jesus' time giving money openly to the temple while refusing to support their own needy family members mean that we can consider money spent on family members as part of our tithe? Or does it indicate that we should both pay our tithes and spend money to aid our needy relatives?

I have heard from the pulpit two arguments for the tithe being the bare minimum for a Christian to give to the church. One is the fact that we have many more blessings from God than the OT Jews did, and therefore we should be even more generous in returning our proceeds to Him. It is a good point, and certainly should encourage us to consider giving at least one-tenth of our income, however we define that term. The other argument that I have heard is that if one counts up all the myriad of special offerings in addition to the tithe that Jews needed to give to the temple every year, they amounted to about 40% of an average family's yearly income. I don't know how in the world that particular number could have possibly been arrived at. But I am a bit suspicious considering the large number of variables involved in such a calculation.

Even with the myriad of required yearly and special offerings, there is something concerning the tithe on produce and the firstborn of the livestock (representing the major income for most families) that is seldom pointed out. Deuteronomy 14:22-26 explains that two out of every three years, that food is to be brought to the temple by each family who then are to eat it themselves joyfully in the presence of the LORD, thanking him for their blessings. In a way, therefore, it is like a believer today saying grace with each meal, and not really at all similar to a tithe offering given to the church.

Please don't latch on to this last point above to use it as yet another loophole to avoid giving back to God what is due him, because the most applicable model for giving has yet to be mentioned.

Stewardship

This appears to be the best NT principle to follow in terms of giving. It certainly is the focus of Jesus' teachings in his Parable of the Talents, which has given rise to the concept of our being good stewards of not only our treasure, but also our time and talents.

However, surprisingly even it has its critics. Jacques Ellul for one appears to deplore the idea of stewardship of money since he treats “Money” as an evil force in itself that attempts to rival the true God. And if that is true, nothing good can come of it. This view actually seems to fit in quite well with NT teachings that treat money as Mammon, a God which demands to be worshiped and with the expression “filthy lucre” found in several NT passages. But in rebuttal, look at Luke 16:9-11 where we are told to be faithful even in how we use our money (unrighteous Mammon). As Colin Brown says, “The point is that mammon itself does not endure, but it may be used to achieve something which is enduring.”

A Different Perspective

I am not claiming that this final view is a new one at all, just that all of the above approaches have one thing in common: they all focus on how much we are to give. I think that we need to sometimes step back and ask ourselves instead: “How much should I keep for my own use?” After all, this is why Jesus praised the widow for the mite she had given since it was all she had.

By contrast, we see the rich man who may have been a loyal tither who dines royally while Lazarus literally lies starving at his door. Similarly, the foolish landowner who built more barns to store all his goods may not have been cheating anyone to get these blessings, but he certainly could have given that excess grain to those who needed it badly. I am certainly glad for the billionaires who donate large amounts of money to charitable causes, but from God's perspective (which should be our own), they still have much more left that could have been given to others, and so do most of us.