Does the Bible teach that Christians are required to tithe to the Church?

By Brian Knowles

The practice of tithing is common in Christian Churches. It has been since the Roman Catholic Church first declared it compulsory for Catholics and Jews many centuries ago (though most do not practice it today). The issue here is not whether Christians may of their own free will tithe – of course they may. A Christian is free to give any amount he or she wishes to the Church, to the poor, or to anyone else for that matter. But voluntary tithing is not truly what many churches teach. Rather they teach that the Bible requires of Christians that they tithe. For them, failure to tithe is to sin – it is to "rob God." The issue for me is, could I conscientiously teach that such is the case? Could I teach that tithing is Scripturally required of Christians, and that failure to do so is sin? Could I, in all honesty, teach that failure to tithe to the Church is a violation of God’s law as it applies to Christians? The answer is no. In this article, I hope to explain why.

Exegetical Methodology
Assuming that certain people are utterly sincere, which I do, the issue becomes one of exegetical methodology and understanding. It’s a matter of how we use the Scriptures to form doctrine and to support dogma. If something is a commandment (a mitzvah), it’s a commandment. If it’s not, it’s not. If it is a commandment, we must then consider to whom it is directed, and under which circumstances it is to be appropriately applied. The fact that a commandment is included in Scripture does not necessarily prove that all Christians, throughout all time, are bound to keep it in all circumstances.

The great Medieval Jewish sage, Moses Maimonides (1135-1204), made a study of the 613 commandments (mitzva’ot) of Torah. He concluded that in his day observant Jews could keep only 271 of them. What happened to the other 342? They were "on the books" but did not apply to Jews in the Diasporic circumstances of Maimonides’ day.

Those who teach that tithing is an obligation for Christians often use Scripture selectively, even indiscriminately. As we have just noted, the five books of Moses contain some 613 mitzva’ot (commandments). Those who select, then adapt, the tithing commandments for obedience by Christians often ignore many of the other commandments of Torah. Or, if they accept them, they modify them to suit current ecclesiastical purposes. We could call this "the obedience of expedience." So let’s begin by establishing some working principles of exegesis.

The Issue of Audience
In the Public Relations profession, a specific audience is called a "public." The PR practitioner tailors his or her messages for specific publics. The Bible does the same thing. Solomon Schonfeld understands and explains this principle:

"…it was a mistake to offer the whole of the Five Books to mankind at large, as if all the happenings to Israel of old and the laws given to them and their descendants were ever intended by the Bible to have universal application! The text itself repeatedly stresses, ‘Speak unto the children of Israel.’ Yet Bible devotees and propagators have unwittingly disobeyed the Bible and have extended the application of purely Israelite observance to all the peoples of the earth, as if no nation would become godly unless it adhered also to obligations specifically Jewish."

Schonfeld continues, "The Bible itself is explicit as to which of its parts refer to mankind generally, and which sections apply exclusively to its immediate recipients, namely the children of Jacob."

This is a working principle of Biblical exegesis. Put another way, text without context is pretext. Every law of Torah has a specific context and an appropriate application. As we learned from Maimonides, the fact that it is a law that is "on the books" does not mean that it automatically applies to everyone in all times and circumstances. The Biblical laws concerning tithing are a case in point. There is a finite number of Scriptural passages that address the issue of tithing. The case for compulsory tithing, if indeed it can be made, must be based upon these passages. The issue is, are these Biblical texts being appropriately used by those who insist that tithing is obligatory for Christians? We shall see.

First, let’s establish one thing up front: Do some churches actually teach that tithing is required of Christians as a matter of obedience to God – or am I merely creating a straw man argument here? A few churches do appear to hedge on this issue. Tithing is both "voluntary" and a matter of "obedience to God." Here’s how one denomination answers the question, "Is tithing voluntary?" "Everyone who honors God by obeying his instructions does so on a voluntary basis. God never forces anyone to act against his or her will. At the same time, however, He expects us to tithe and equates failure to tithe with robbing Him (Malachi 3:8)." Those who teach obligatory tithing typically use this approach or a variation on it. Tithing is "voluntary" but if you don’t do it you’re robbing God – hence sinning.

Of course we all know that we are free moral agents. We have a choice as to whether we will or will not obey God, as did the ancient Israelites (Deuteronomy 30:19). But the way this answer is worded makes it appear that our only choice is between obeying or disobeying God by tithing or not tithing. The passage in Malachi 3 is applied to all people in all times. In this interpretation, failure of Christian to tithe to the Church becomes "robbing God."
This is clearly a bogus application of Scripture. It is ripping a text out of its historical context and reapplying it to a different time, circumstance and audience. With that in mind, lets go back and examine the text in its original setting.

Malachi’s True Message
The name "Malachi" means "my messenger." He was the last (12^th) of the so-called "minor" prophets. With Malachi, the "Old Testament" period came to a close. Malachi apparently wrote around 433 BCE, during the time of Artaxerxes I (464-423 BCE) and Darius II (423-404 BCE). He was also a contemporary of Nehemiah (445-415 BCE) who was heading a project to build the broken down walls of Jerusalem. Ezra and Zerubbabel had earlier rebuilt the Temple. Scholar J.M.P. Smith says of this book: "…the book of Malachi fits the situation amid which Nehemiah worked as snugly as a bone fits its socket." Nehemiah had returned to Israel in 444 BCE to rebuild the wall around Jerusalem. The restoration period of Ezra-Nehemiah lasted about a century. During this time, representatives of Israel’s tribes were returning to their own land to reestablish themselves and the religion of Israel. To avoid repeating the sins of the past that led to their captivity, the leaders of the time – Ezra, Zerubbabel and Nehemiah – insisted on rebuilding the nation’s relationship to God through Torah and the Mosaic Covenant. The issues of Nehemiah and those of Malachi run parallel to each other. Both, for example, stressed the importance of reestablishing Israel’s tithing system in order to support the priests and the Levites who ministered at the newly rebuilt Temple (Nehemiah 10:37-39; Malachi 3:7-10).

The overall message of Malachi is addressed to "Israel" (1:1), not to the gentiles and certainly not to the Church that was yet to emerge some four centuries later. With all this in mind, lets examine the relevant passages in Nehemiah and Malachi.

Nehemiah and Tithing
When Nehemiah addresses the issue of tithing, he is referring to the same circumstances about which Malachi is concerned. Notice carefully the wording of Nehemiah’s declaration on the subject:

"Moreover, we [the Israelites] will bring to the storerooms of the house of our God, to the priests, the first of our ground meal, of our grain offerings, of the fruit of all our trees and our new wine and oil. And we will bring a tithe of our crops to the Levites, for it is the Levites who collect the tithes in all the towns where we work. A priest descended from Aaron is to accompany the Levites when they receive the tithes up to the house of our God, to the storerooms of the treasury. The people of Israel, including the Levites, are to bring their contributions of grain, new wine and oil to the storerooms where the articles for the sanctuary are kept and where the ministering priests, the gatekeepers and the singers stay.

Nehemiah is plainly addressing the issue of the restoration of the Priestly and Levitical systems to the service of God and the Temple. In fulfilling the Law of Moses the people brought their tithes to the Levites in the cities where they lived, and the Levites in turn tithed to the priests on what they received. Only Levites and priests were ever commanded or empowered in Torah to receive tithes. No other class of people, whether they be prophets, rabbis, captains of synagogues, cantors or Christian ministers, has ever been authorized to receive the first tithe from the days of Moses to the end of the Apostolic Age. From its inception, it was strictly set aside for the priests and the Levites because they have no property inheritance in Eretz Yisrael. The wording of Numbers 18:21 is explicit: "I give to the Levites all the tithes (ma’aserot) in Israel as their inheritance in return for the work they do while serving at the Tent of Meeting." Note "to the Levites," "in Israel," and "for the work they do." The Jewish people have always understood the specificity of this command. No where do we find Jesus or his apostles reinterpreting this command to apply to the Christian ministry. In his day, the apostles would have paid their tithes to the priests and Levites for the Temple service as did all Jews living in Palestine. Jesus himself, in "fulfilling all righteousness," would have done the same. How then did the Church end up appropriating the tithe? It certainly wasn’t an apostolic decision.

The Encyclopedia of Jewish Knowledge puts it succinctly: "The tithe was to be given to the Levites…The tithe was taken over by the church [Roman Catholic], and is still one of the main supports for an established ecclesiastical organization. In Jewish writings, however, the suggestion was made that the tithes which could no longer be given because of the destruction of the Temple should be devoted to charity; many individuals still assess themselves a tenth of their income for this purpose."

The Jewish people realized that the tithe was for the Levites and priests only, and that once the Temple was destroyed, the law – as it was drafted – could no longer be observed. The tradition of giving a tenth to the poor was not a divinely imposed, Biblical law, but rather something that became voluntary – "self-assessed" -- on the part of individual Jews.

The Jewish people understood that the "main purpose [of the tithe] was the maintenance of the Temple and its personnel." Once the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD, the tithing law no longer applied. The priests and the Levites had to find new ways of earning a living. The Synagogue had never demanded the tithe for it would have been illegal for it to do so. Rabbis in Jesus’ day were never supported by the tithe, unless they happened also to be priests or Levites (which some were).

Originally, "As appears in the Bible, the law of tithing was to be applied in Palestine only…" For a period of time following the destruction of the Temple, tithes continued to be paid in Palestine, Syria and Babylonia. But, as the great medieval sage, Moses Maimonides, said of the first tithe, "…Torah does not make it obligatory except in the Land of Israel [and then of course only while the tabernacle or Temple systems were in operation.]" Maimonides’ teaching on this reflected the Talmud which explained that the duty of setting aside a tenth was based on the principle "Every precept dependent on the land [of Israel] is in force only in that land…" The tithing laws related specifically to the land of Israel, which was variously defined, and not to the Diaspora generally. In addition, it was intended only for the priests and the Levites, though some paid it directly to the Temple.

One thing is certain, "…very few people observed the laws of the tithe properly" Not only was the wording of the original Biblical legislation difficult to interpret, but the financial stresses on Israelites throughout history were enormous. The legal aspects of tithing were the cause of the creation of a special section of the Talmud called Demai.

The Order of Tithes in Ancient Israel
The theocracy of Israel has long passed into history. The Temple is no more and the priests and Levites have ceased to function in their ritual roles. Consequently, after 70 AD, Israel’s tithing system, such as it was ceased. Giving a tenth to the poor was not observing the law of tithing; it was substituting for it, or replacing it.

"The order of the tithes was as follows. First the heave-offering (terumah) was set aside for the priest. This usually amounted to a fiftieth of the produce. The first tithe from the remainder was then given to the Levite, who, when he received it, gave one tenth of it to the priest, thus rendering the remainder of the first tithe permitted food everywhere, even for those in a state of uncleanness. In the first, second, fourth and fifth years of the Sabbatical cycle, the layman then set aside a second tithe to be taken up to the city of Jerusalem and there eaten in a state of cleanness (or he might take up its redemption money, i.e. its value plus a fifth)…

"In the third and sixth years of the Sabbatical cycle the second tithe was not set aside; in its place the poor man’s tithe was given. This the poor could eat anywhere, even in a state of uncleanness."

Jewish authorities agree that this was the pattern of tithing during those periods of Israel’s history when it was rightly practiced. It was this system that Ezra, Nehemiah and Malachi sought to restore. For the Church to construe Malachi 3:8-11 to represent a commandment for the modern non-Jewish Christian to tithe to the Church is a gross exegetical distortion. Doing so rips these words right out of their original context and plants them where they do not belong.

Every Jew knows that no one other than the priest and the Levite has ever been entitled to claim the tithe on the basis of Biblical law.

This is very similar to the article. Thanks for pointing me back at it.

Tithing? Religious telemanipulators and even pastors have often appealed to Malachi 3:8-11, telling Christians who fall behind on their tithes that they are "robbing God." They then urge their Christian listeners to prove the Lord, to see if He will not open "windows of heaven," to "pour out" a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it (v. 10, KJV). Driven by guilt and drawn by tantalizing promises and visions of millions of dollars supernaturally pouring in to "pay back" our tithes, many Christians have tithed away desperately, all because of this allegedly Scriptural appeal.

But once apply the Biblical principle of comparing the dispensational context, our view will necessarily change. When was Malachi written? Was it written to a Christian church? In fact, Malachi was written centuries before the beginning of the Christian church at Pentecost after Christ’s ascension. It was addressed to Israel, then, within the context of the Law of Moses. Thus, the dispensational context is not difficult to determine.

We will then note that the law of Moses did command Israel to tithe, on more than one occasion (cf. Leviticus 27:30; Numbers 18:21; Deuteronomy 14:22, 28). We will notice that it was connected with Israel’s form of theocratic government, and with the Levitical priesthood. We will recall that the "blessings" promised here (Malachi 3:10) fits in with the material terms of the conditional Mosaic Covenant (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28).

Then we will search the NT for any passage re-affirming a law of tithing, and urging Church-age Christians to tithe. We want to see if this, too, is a trans-covenantal, or trans-dispensational, principle, such as faith or prayer. Our search will be in vain, however. No church nor Christian is urged to tithe, per se. This will lead to the conclusion that there simply is no such requirement under the New Covenant.

We will further see that Christians are indeed urged to support their leaders financially (1 Corinthians 9:9-14; Galatians 6:6; 1 Timothy 5:17), and to help the needy (cf. 1 Timothy 5:3-16; 1 John 3:17, 18). So the idea of giving, support of God’s servants, and generosity to the needy are still in effect. But we will find no specific percentage laid down as God’s law, God’s requirement, for Christians.

Accordingly, it will be illegitimate to use Malachi 3 to constrain Christians to tithe. It would be legitimate to apply the principle that we should be concerned to give gratefully to God, in accord with Malachi 3 and passages such as Proverbs 3:9. But we will note that the NT teaches that our fundamental offering is ourselves (Romans 12:1, 2) - though our finances are part of ourselves too!

May I shed a little light on tithing. I am listing two links to sermons/articles on this principle. Bottom line: when you pay your income tax, you are paying the tithe. What you give to your church or a mission organization, or Crisis Pregnancy Center, is your Free Will Offering the over and above the tithe.

The tithe supported the Levitical priests of the OT; today, it supports the government ordained by God (Romans 13:1).

BTW, in the OT, the tithe was 23.3%, plus, when you harvested your fields, you did so in a circle, and leftthe corners to the poor, and you also paid a Temple tax each year.

Hope this is helpful.

The Christian and Government: Paying Your Taxes--Part 1 by John MacArthur.

Question and Answers with John MacArthur

xzins to RnMomof7: "So, then, you agree that tithing is not a requirement for the Church. Did I read you correctly?"

Just as you rely upon "dispensational context" in a previous post, you are looking for support for the practice of giving less than a tenth to God.

The only "requirement" for the church is to love God with all our being, and to love our neighbor as ourself. However, it is hard for me to imagine that one can fulfill that "requirement" if they are stingy in their giving. Heavens to Betsy, if the pre-incarnation saints were "required" to give a tenth of their substance to the Lord why would we think that we who have been blessed beyond measure can show our love to Him by giving less?

If we are looking for His guidance as to how much we should give in support of His work we will not go wrong by beginning with the tenth, and then adding to it as He directs.

My question still stands: Are the amounts confiscated from my income by the IRS "holy unto the Lord"?

The money you give to the government pays for basic services...and then some. Because governments are run by fallen men and women, we are not going to like everything they do. I served for 29 years in the US Army. Some of your "confiscated" money paid my salary while I was defending your right to protest, or do what ever else you wnted to do. Some of that money paved some dirt roads that you now drive on. Granted the system is far from perfect. I would like to see us go to a flat tax (read tithe). There was no graduated income tax in the OT...everyone paid the same, as unto the Lord.

I read the articles (unfortunately, and my respect for John McArthur has diminshed some as a result)

I am sorry to hear this. What do you object to, his citing of Scripture, or the tearing down of your apparently long held beliefs - based on what again? John is one of the finest Bible teachers in the country, perhaps the world. He is meticulous with the Word...and has spent thousands of hours studying the Word. He is a godly man, who walks the talk. Tell me again your qualifications for interpreting the Scriptures?

"The money you give to the government...." "Give"? What happens if I choose not to "give"?

"I served for 29 years in the US Army. Some of your "confiscated" money paid my salary while I was defending your right to protest....." I only served 5 years, prior to being medically retired following an M-60 tank accident at Ft. Hood. Don't bother apologizing for your insults.

"Tell me again your qualifications for interpreting the Scriptures?" Chosen by God before the foundation of the world, regenerated by and indwelt by His Spirit (see I Cor 2:14-16). That should be sufficient. But, I could add MDiv from SWBTS and 14 years in the pastorate. Once again, don't bother apologizing.

Now that that is out of the way, let me say that I normally find John McArthur to be rock-solid. Yet, I can't help wondering what possessed him to equate our current tax structure with the OT tithe. It is quite possible to speak about our responsibility to the support of the Lord's work without either appealing to the tithe, or taking the stance that he has demonstrated in the articles you posted.

As you stated yourself, indirectly, we have a regressive tax system that is anything but divinely inspired. Else, why your support for a flat tax?

I have a question regarding this idea that by paying your taxes you are paying your tithe.

All the information in those articles seemed to be (and correct me if I'm wrong) based for individuals. What about on a larger, corprate level?

If paying your income tax is, in fact, paying a tithe, then aren't the Churches neglecting their responsibility by hiding behind a tax-free status?

What right do Churches have to weasle out of their civic (and, by implication from this article, Divine) duty by operating tax-free?

SIDE QUESTION: Does it bother anyone else when churches offer a book, or some other item, for "free" provinding you give them a "love gift" (or some such) of a specific amount? Aren't they simply using the term "love gift" merely to get away from paying sales tax? And, if so, isn't that cheating?

What happens if I choose not to "give"?

What happened when the Israelites didn't give their tithe? We can chose not to do anything, understanding fully that we may suffer the consequences for not doing so.

I only served 5 years, prior to being medically retired following an M-60 tank accident at Ft. Hood. Don't bother apologizing for your insults.

Wasn't attempting to be insulting, was only attempting to indicate their are a lot of legitimate things that our tax dollars pay for. Sorry for any afront you may have felt.

But, I could add MDiv from SWBTS and 14 years in the pastorate. Once again, don't bother apologizing.

Again, no insult was intended. Far too often Freepers posting their "feelings" and really have not researched the topics well. I am a Talbot grad myself, and hold SWBTS in high regard. Note to self: work harder at asking questions without sounding like an idiot.

I can't help wondering what possessed him to equate our current tax structure with the OT tithe.

I don't think he is equating them. I think what he is doing is demonstrating that if God has ordained government (Rom 13), and the government has the responsibility for defending the innocent and providing for our general protection, how is that financed? The government is not in the business of producing a product, as say a manufacturer. As the people supported the Levitical priesthood in the OT, the only government they knew for a time, so we should be supporting the government of the people. I will be the first to agree the manner in which it is carried out is, at best, problematical, and at worst, confiscatory (it run by fallen men), but the fact remains, there is an analogy.

Tithing and income tax are issues for persons - individuals. Corporate taxes are an entirely different matter. And Churches are not told to pay a tithe...that is done by the people of the Church. It occurs to me that if the Church had to pay an income taxt, and the Church is operating off of the money "offered" by its members (it produces, in most instances, no marketable, profit making product), then to "tax" the offereings is to tax the money of those aleady taxed. In other words, I as an idividual pay a percentage of my income as a tax to support the government, and then, since I am the Church, pay a tax on it again.

Before I go much deeper, and find myself in a hole I can't climb out of, I think I will stop. I am not an accountant, nor an economist. And I think I have already said more than I know. Sorry. :-)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.