For many Christians around the world, tithing is an issue that is surrounded by controversy. They don't know whether the Bible permits or requires it or not. Some look to the foundations of Christendom for support on this issue. Existing at the foundations of the faith are patriarchs such as Abraham. Those who examine his life will discover that Abraham did not tithe.
The issue surrounding the patriarch and tithing originates in Genesis. In chapter fourteen of Genesis Abraham's battle with the four kings. Abraham had engaged in battle to rescue his nephew Lot who had been captured by the four Kings.
The four Kings had taken more than Lot though. They had also taken other captives and the possessions of the people who were living in Sodom and Gomorrah. This means that Lot's possessions were also taken away since he was living among the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The patriarch was victorious. He was victorious because he did not go alone. He had help in the form of a number of allies who are named in verse thirteen as Mamre, Aner and Eshcol. He also had the Lord with him in battle and this was the chief reason for his victory.
Since he had the assistance of the other men, it is easy to view the post war action as that of issuing rewards in the form of the spoils of war rather than tithing. Melchidezek bestows a blessing on the patriarch after the battle and is given a tenth of the spoils. This is not a tithe. It is simply a reward for bravery and victory. The patriarch asks the King of Sodom to allow the men to have their share of the plunder in verse twenty four.
The patriarch did not give of his own possessions as is required in tithing. In chapter twenty two he responds to an offer by the king of Sodom for him to take all the food and wealth by stating that he had made an oath to God that he would take nothing from him. He asked instead that the men bellowed to eat some of the food and that his fellow warriors be given a share of the spoils as is due to them. His denial of ownership of the spoils of war means that he did not give from his own possessions.The failure to fulfill this requirement rules out the act as one of tithe giving.
Additionally tithing is a frequent, habitual act. This is why today's tithers use weekly, bi-weekly or monthly routines. This was a single activity with no evidence of repetition thereafter.
This patriarch was certainly not a tither. His giving was not an organized habitual one. It was rather a single event that fulfilled a custom of sharing the rewards of a well fought battle. Additionally, his failure to view the possessions as his own rules out the act as tithing since it would not have been truly his to give.
The issue surrounding the patriarch and tithing originates in Genesis. In chapter fourteen of Genesis Abraham's battle with the four kings. Abraham had engaged in battle to rescue his nephew Lot who had been captured by the four Kings.
The four Kings had taken more than Lot though. They had also taken other captives and the possessions of the people who were living in Sodom and Gomorrah. This means that Lot's possessions were also taken away since he was living among the people of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The patriarch was victorious. He was victorious because he did not go alone. He had help in the form of a number of allies who are named in verse thirteen as Mamre, Aner and Eshcol. He also had the Lord with him in battle and this was the chief reason for his victory.
Since he had the assistance of the other men, it is easy to view the post war action as that of issuing rewards in the form of the spoils of war rather than tithing. Melchidezek bestows a blessing on the patriarch after the battle and is given a tenth of the spoils. This is not a tithe. It is simply a reward for bravery and victory. The patriarch asks the King of Sodom to allow the men to have their share of the plunder in verse twenty four.
The patriarch did not give of his own possessions as is required in tithing. In chapter twenty two he responds to an offer by the king of Sodom for him to take all the food and wealth by stating that he had made an oath to God that he would take nothing from him. He asked instead that the men bellowed to eat some of the food and that his fellow warriors be given a share of the spoils as is due to them. His denial of ownership of the spoils of war means that he did not give from his own possessions.The failure to fulfill this requirement rules out the act as one of tithe giving.
Additionally tithing is a frequent, habitual act. This is why today's tithers use weekly, bi-weekly or monthly routines. This was a single activity with no evidence of repetition thereafter.
This patriarch was certainly not a tither. His giving was not an organized habitual one. It was rather a single event that fulfilled a custom of sharing the rewards of a well fought battle. Additionally, his failure to view the possessions as his own rules out the act as tithing since it would not have been truly his to give.
No comments:
Post a Comment