In the light of the New Covenant: Is tithing right or wrong, biblical or unbiblical?
Please always get the latest version of this document, from the Bible Pages web site, at this address: www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/em01d.htm
Need larger text? Go to your browser's "View" menu and look for "Text size" or "Zoom".
Do the Scriptures command believers to give money to a church, minister or preacher?
Should we tithe? Many clergymen have preached hot sermons, claiming that they have
a right to ten percent of people's income. But what does the Bible teach concerning
that, and especially, what does the New Testament say about this matter? Does the
Old Covenant with its tithing rules apply to us? Or, putting it in another way –
in the light of the New Covenant: Is tithing right or wrong, biblical or unbiblical?
And also, regarding the Old Covenant and its rules – who were to tithe and what
things were tithable? In short: What is the truth about tithing, the concept of
giving "tithes" and "offerings" to a church or a preacher?
This essay contains a detailed study that brings clarity to the "tithe question", directly from the Bible. It includes specific commentary and biblical analysis regarding clergymen's claims of having "a right to tithes and offerings".
A note: This treatise concentrates on the "tithe question". For essays on related matters, see the "Additional reading" section towards the end of this present essay. Look also under the heading "Silver and gold" on the index-page keyw-s5.htm.
The etymology, origin and meaning of the word the English word tithe is explained in the first footnote towards the end of this present essay. That note takes also a look at certain Greek and Hebrew tithe- and tithing-related words.
In short, the question that one must ask and then thoroughly study, is this: What is the truth about the concept of giving "tithes" and "offerings" to a church? We know that under the Old Covenant, in the land of Israel, there was a system where a tenth part of agricultural produce was set aside for special use. But again, the question that we must find a correct answer to, is this: Is tithing right or wrong, biblical or unbiblical, in the light of the New Covenant?
There are many different views and claims regarding that subject. Likewise, there are numerous interpretations of various, at least seemingly relevant scriptures in the Old and New Testaments. Ministers (preachers) usually quote a number of bible-passages in connection with their claims, and they often talk about "God's share", "giving to God", "putting God first", "not robbing God", and so on. By all that, they refer to money being given to the preacher or his church. Often, they ask for even more than a tenth part of people's wages, earnings or other income. ("Tithe" is the same as one tenth part of something, ten percent.)
But, the important thing is to find out, what is the truly biblical viewpoint or conclusion regarding tithing, and also in general when it comes to money in connection with religious fellowships? What does the New Testament say about the matter of the tithe? And, did the apostle Paul really "teach tithing", as some preachers have claimed? What about Jesus? And also: Since it is fully clear that the Old Covenant's tithe was only on the Promised Land's agricultural produce, that leads to the question, what is the origin of the concept of demanding a tithe of people's wages, income or earnings – who invented that? Further: Since virtually all bible-translations have been produced by churches and churchmen (who live on tithes or similar), one must ask, are those translations reliable, when it comes to these things?
In this essay, it will be shown what the Scriptures, especially the New Testament, really say about this matter. Even the origin of the word and concept "clergy" will be explained, because it is intimately connected to the "tithe question". As a side-point, the subject of the Old Covenant's tithe will also be studied – such questions as, who set aside the tithe, what things were tithable, how many tithes were there, and so on. Further, the tenth part (of certain recovered goods) that Abraham gave to Melchizedek, will also be considered, as well as the question whether or not the patriarch Jacob who promised the Lord a tenth part of certain things, ever actually tithed.
For those who are interested, there is commentary on the origin and meaning (etymology) of the English word "tithe", and notes on certain Greek and Hebrew tithe- and tithing-related words, in a footnote towards the end of this essay.
The matter of the two covenants, old and new, is important to understand, in connection with the "tithe question". For more on that subject, look under the heading "Covenants" on the index-page keyw-c4.htm. For other essays on monetary matters in connection with religious fellowships, look under the heading "Silver and gold" on the index-page keyw-s5.htm.
Many preachers or "ministers" have in fact claimed that they somehow have "inherited a right to a tithe", and they have defined that tithe as ten percent of people's monetary income.
The linguistic background of "the clergy claim" is as follows. The modern-day English word "clergy" comes from the Old English cleric, clerc. Those words are in their turn derived from the Greek adjective klêrikos, from the noun klêros which meant "lot", "inheritance". More exactly: This has to do with the word klêros ("inheritance") in Deuteronomy 18:2 in the LXX or Septuagint, an ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament. Here is the passage in question, first in English translation:
Deuteronomy 18:1 "The priests, the Levites—all the tribe of Levi—shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel; they shall eat the offerings of the LORD made by fire, and His portion. 2 "Therefore they shall have no inheritance among their brethren; the LORD is their inheritance, as He said to them. (NKJV)
The Greek LXX text, with the word klêros highlighted:
Deuteronomy 18:1 Ouk estai tois hiereusin tois Leuitais olê phulê Leui meris oude klêros meta Israêl karpômata Kuriou o klêros autôn phagontai auta. 2 Klêros de ouk estai autois en tois adelphois autôn Kurios autos klêros autou kathoti eipen autô. (LXX)
In short, the word "clergy" is taken from the Septuagint's translation of Deuteronomy 18:1-2. That is: Many preachers – calling themselves "ministers", "clergymen" – have claimed that they supposedly are "a new priesthood" which supposedly has "inherited" the Levites' lot, in Greek klêros, whence the word "clergy".
A note: The "lot" or inheritance which the Levites received under the Old Covenant, included a right to eat certain parts of some sacrificed animals, plus a right to a certain portion of the other tribes' agricultural produce in the land of Israel. (That was because the tribe of Levi did not receive as much agricultural land as the other tribes did.)
However, what those preachers have claimed, and caused many people to believe, is neither true nor biblical. The Old Covenant's Levitical priesthood was neither "modified" nor "transferred" to some new priesthood. It was discontinued, and so was the system which had been there as a partial means for supporting that priesthood. This might sound strange to some, but here is a biblical fact: The New Covenant has no mortal "clergy" or "priesthood". (Yes, churches have "priests" and "clergymen", but that has nothing to do with the Bible. Regarding churches, see the essays ea01d.htm, eg06b.htm, ea02d.htm and ea03d.htm.)
The saints had only one priest – Jesus. And, the elders the saints elected in their fellowships, were not paid. Also: God and Jesus have no "vicars" here on Earth. (The Latin noun vicarius means "substitute", "deputy", "proxy", "vicegerent".) Just as it was with the saints (in the first century), so it is even today: Believers are to have only one priest: Jesus. (Regarding the dogma about a supposed "priesthood of all believers", see the essay eo03d.htm.)
As was mentioned earlier, the Old Covenant's "tithe" was only on the agricultural produce of the land of Israel. It is important to note that the concept of giving or demanding a tithe on wages has no biblical basis or justification at all; it was invented and put into practice in the Middle Ages, by the Catholic Church.
The Bible does not mention any "inheritance" of the kind the Levites had had, for elders (or preachers). And again: The New Covenant does not have any mortal priests.
Even these simple facts make it totally clear that the "clergy claim" – the claim by some preachers that they supposedly have "inherited" the Levites' lot – is totally unbiblical.
There are certain New Testament passages which preachers often quote when they ask for money. Later in this essay, there is more on those things, and on what the apostle Paul really taught in regard to monetary matters. Look also under the heading "Silver and gold" on the index-page keyw-s5.htm. The essay em02c.htm shows what the apostle Paul actually meant when he said to certain elders that it was for them "more blessed to give than to receive" (Acts 20).
Sometimes when preachers claim that they supposedly have "a right" to a part of other people's hard earned wages, they even quote Haggai 2:8, and proceed to say or insinuate that as supposed "special representatives of God", they have "a claim on gold and silver" (in the meaning "money").
Without at this point going into the question whether or not those preachers are "representatives of God", let us note that Haggai 2 does not refer to money, or even to silver and gold in general. The context, such as verse 9, is about building a house for the Lord – a temple. Point: Haggai 2 does not refer to money. It refers to temple silver and temple gold which the Babylonians had taken away from Jerusalem and which in the days of Haggai was returned.
The prophet Haggai probably accompanied Zerubbabel when the first group of Jews returned from Babylon. Haggai 1:1 tells us that he began to prophesy "in the second year of Darius the king". Through Haggai, the Lord was urging the Jews to get going with the interrupted work of building a new temple.
Let us first view the passage in question:
Haggai 2:8 The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, says the LORD of hosts. 9 The latter splendor of this house [A] shall be greater than the former, says the LORD of hosts; and in this place I will give prosperity, says the LORD of hosts. (NRSV)
[A] "House" – the new temple which the Jews who had returned from Babylon, were to build in Jerusalem.
Background: When Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had taken the Jews to captivity, he had also taken to Babylon the vessels of gold and silver (bowls and basins and so on) which had belonged to the temple in Jerusalem. But Babylon had fallen, being conquered by king Cyrus of Persia, year 538 BCE. Cyrus had issued a decree which gave the Jews a right to return to their land and build a new temple in Jerusalem. We read – note especially verse 7:
Ezra 1:1 In the first year of King Cyrus of Persia, in order that the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, the LORD stirred up the spirit of King Cyrus of Persia so that he sent a herald throughout all his kingdom, and also in a written edict declared: 2 "Thus says King Cyrus of Persia: The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem in Judah. 3 Any of those among you who are of his people—may their God be with them!—are now permitted to go up to Jerusalem in Judah, and rebuild the house of the LORD, the God of Israel—he is the God who is in Jerusalem; 4 and let all survivors, in whatever place they reside, be assisted by the people of their place with silver and gold, with goods and with animals, besides freewill offerings for the house of God in Jerusalem." 5 The heads of the families of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests and the Levites—everyone whose spirit God had stirred—got ready to go up and rebuild the house of the LORD in Jerusalem. 6 All their neighbors aided them with silver vessels, with gold, with goods, with animals, and with valuable gifts, besides all that was freely offered. 7 King Cyrus himself brought out the vessels of the house of the LORD that Nebuchadnezzar had carried away from Jerusalem and placed in the house of his gods. 8 King Cyrus of Persia had them released into the charge of Mithredath the treasurer, who counted them out to Sheshbazzar [B] the prince of Judah. 9 And this was the inventory: gold basins, thirty; silver basins, one thousand; knives, twenty-nine; 10 gold bowls, thirty; other silver bowls, four hundred ten; other vessels, one thousand; 11 the total of the gold and silver vessels was five thousand four hundred. All these Sheshbazzar [B] brought up, when the exiles were brought up from Babylonia to Jerusalem. (NRSV, highlighting added)
[B] Sheshbazzar = probably a Babylonian or Persian name given to Zerubbabel.
That was around 538 BCE. But, certain people caused the building work to be interrupted, see Ezra 4:1-24. Because of that, the Jews sent a letter to the (new) king Darius, for help in the process; see Ezra 5:1-17. The result was that king Darius made a decree regarding the new temple, including an order that the temple gold and temple silver which had been in Babylon, was to be returned and placed in that new temple. We read:
Ezra 6:1 Then King Darius made a decree, and they searched the archives where the documents were stored in Babylon. 2 But it was in Ecbatana, the capital in the province of Media, that a scroll was found on which this was written: "A record. 3 In the first year of his reign, King Cyrus issued a decree: Concerning the house of God at Jerusalem, let the house be rebuilt, the place where sacrifices are offered and burnt offerings are brought; its height shall be sixty cubits and its width sixty cubits, 4 with three courses of hewn stones and one course of timber; let the cost be paid from the royal treasury. 5 Moreover, let the gold and silver vessels of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took out of the temple in Jerusalem and brought to Babylon, be restored and brought back to the temple in Jerusalem, each to its place; you shall put them in the house of God." (NRSV, highlighting added)
In short: Haggai 2:8-9 is not about money, or even about gold or silver in general. It refers to the work with building that new temple, and placing the from Babylon returned items of temple gold and temple silver in that new House of God.
But, many preachers have no shame. They twist things, in order to empty gullible people's pockets.
Indeed, did Paul teach tithing? It is important to know what the apostle Paul really said and taught about things of that kind.
Some preachers have claimed that the apostle Paul supposedly "taught tithing", or that "Paul upheld his right to subsist on tithes and offerings" – but the Greek text of the New Testament makes it clear that Paul supported himself through his own, manual work. The essays em02c.htm and em03c.htm have more on this.
Regarding what the apostle Paul really taught about these things – let us consider the occasion when Paul was about to end his life as a free man (when he was about to be imprisoned, and knew about that on beforehand). That event is recorded in Acts 20. At that time, he gave an account of his ending stewardship. Please note that Paul was addressing elders – verse 17 shows this. We read:
Acts 20:17 From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the assembly. 18 And when they had come to him, he said to them [...] 29 For I know that after my departure, burdensome wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock. [C] 30 From among your own selves shall arise men speaking perverted things, in order to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore keep watch, remembering that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone, with tears, night and day. 32 And now I commit you, brothers, to God and the word of his grace, who is able to edify you and to give you an inheritance [D] among all who are sanctified. 33 I have not wanted anyone's silver or gold or clothes [E] – 34 rather, as you yourselves know, these hands [F] have provided for my needs [F] and for those who were with me. 35 I have shown you in everything, by working like this, [G] that we must support the infirm and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that he said, "It is more blessed to give than to receive". [G] (Author's tr.)
[C] Verse 29: "Not sparing the flock" – Paul warned about deceivers ("burdensome wolves", lukoi barei) who would live "at the cost of flock" – men who would teach falsehood in order to live at the cost of others.
[D] Verse 32: The inheritance which is mentioned here, has nothing to with the inheritance or lot of Levi. The essay eb05b.htm explains what and where those saints' inheritance was.
[E] Verse 33: Please note that the apostle Paul stated that he had not wanted anyone's silver or gold or clothes.
[F] Verse 34, "these hands have provided for my needs": Paul further made it clear that he had always supported himself, by his own manual work. (Paul was a skilled tradesman, a tentmaker; see Acts 18:1-3.) And, that he had even provided for others.
[G] Verse 35, "working like this" and "more blessed to give": Paul reminded the elders whom he was addressing, of Jesus' words "it is more blessed to give than to receive" (or "it is happier to give than to receive" as the Greek wording also can be translated). Paul told those elders to be on the giving side, just as he himself had been. And again, he also warned about "wolves", men who would not act like he had done but would instead arrange their lives to be paid by others.
The essay em02c.htm has more on Acts 20:17-35. The essay em03c.htm has more on the example Paul set for others to imitate.
The initial covenant which the Israelites gave their consent to at Mount Sinai, had no tithe system. Instead, that covenant stipulated that the Israelites were to give, as some kind of offerings, the first-fruit of their harvest and the firstlings of their cattle. Also, their firstborn sons were to be given to the Lord's service. (See Exodus 22:29 and 23:19, Leviticus 27:26, and so on.)
However, that system was never put into practice. That original contract (covenant) was changed soon after it had been made, and the first-born sons were replaced by the tribe of Levi (the Levite system). Likewise, the firstlings of Israelites' cattle were replaced with the Levites' cattle. See Numbers 3:12 and 40-45 and 8:16-18, and so on. Here are two passages which contain the core of that change:
Numbers 3:12 And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from the midst of the sons of Israel in the place of every first-born opening a womb among the sons of Israel; and the Levites have become Mine. (LIT)
Numbers 3:45 Take the Levites instead of all the first-born among the sons of Israel, and the cattle of the Levites instead of their cattle. And the Levites shall be Mine; I am Jehovah. (LIT)
But, those things were connected to the Old Covenant, and only to the Promised Land (the land of Canaan). Later in this essay, it will be shown that the biblical record indicates that it was when the Israelites entered the Promised Land, that tithing began.
Again, the New Covenant has no mortal priesthood, and no altars or sacrifices (offerings). Churches have those things, but that has nothing to do with the Bible. The essays ea01d.htm, eg06b.htm, ea02d.htm and ea03d.htm have more on churches.
What Abram gave to Melchizedek (whoever he may have been) was a tenth part of stolen but recovered things that belonged to the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. Some war-lords (robbers) had stolen those things from Sodom and Gomorrah (see Genesis 14:11-12). Abraham decided to help the people of those cities, and chased the robbers and defeated them. Then he returned the stolen property to its rightful owners in Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 14:13-16). Abraham earned nothing in that. He took nothing for himself. He only took back the things (and people) that the robbers had stolen, and returned them to their owners (and families). There was no increase or earnings involved in that at all.
It was out of those things (the belongings that robbers had taken from the people of Sodom and Gomorrah) that Abraham gave a tenth part to Melchizedek, and not of his own property. (The biblical record does not tell us whether the inhabitants of those cities gave their consent to that.)
And again, that had nothing to do with the Levitical system which came to be established around 400 years later. Also: The tithe in connection with the much later agreement regarding a Levitical system was only on agricultural produce. There was no tithe on things captured in war.
A note regarding "spoils" (things robbed from others through war), which some preachers have talked about. This has to do with the translation of the Greek word akrothinion [H] in Hebrews 7:4. The facts are that Abraham did not get or take any "spoils of war" on that occasion – he merely recovered stolen goods and returned it to its owners. Consequently, whatever Abraham gave to Melchizedek, whoever Melchizedek was and for whatever reason Abraham did that, that had nothing to do with the Old Covenant and its tithe system (which both came much later). Nor does the Bible mention any "everlasting tithing law", or even suggest that there would be such a thing.
[H] A note: The literal meaning of the word akrothinion was "top of the heap".
However, anyone who is interested in knowing what was said later, a long time after Abraham's day, under the Old Covenant, about real spoils of war, can read Numbers 31 for more. That passage mentions a special occasion when there was a huge quantity of goods taken in war. At that time, special arrangements were made, in order to ensure that all got a share of the spoils, and not only the men of war. On that occasion, even the Levitical priests were granted a share, 0.2 percent (a five-hundredth part), and also the other Levites, 2 percent (a fiftieth part). The rest of the nation shared 97.8 percent of the spoils among themselves. But that was sharing spoils, and that had nothing to do with the tithe.
Many preachers have brushed aside those facts and many others like them, and have kept on claiming that tithing supposedly was "a part of the original law of God" (whatever that might be), and that it supposedly was for that reason that Abram gave a tenth part of certain things to Melchizedek. However, they have failed to show a copy of such a supposed "original law of God", or proof that such a thing would have existed. In other words: The Bible gives no support for such claims; they are taken out of the thin air.
But, some preachers have not given up but have kept on talking about Abraham, and about Melchizedek. They have claimed that Abraham supposedly "tithed" (to Melchizedek), because of some "everlasting tithing law", or whatever. They have further claimed that "since Abraham was the father of the faithful", then all "faithful" people of our day supposedly must tithe. And then, those preachers have been quick to claim or to insinuate that they somehow are (or represent) a "Melchizedek priesthood".
How is it with that matter? Here is the passage in question, Genesis 14:17-20:
Genesis 14:17 Then after his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the valley of Shaveh (that is, the King's Valley). 18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High. 19 And he blessed him and said, "Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; 20 And blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand." And he gave him a tenth of all. 21 And the king of Sodom said to Abram, "Give the people to me and take the goods for yourself." 22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I have sworn to the LORD God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth, 23 that I will not take a thread or a sandal thong or anything that is yours, lest you should say, 'I have made Abram rich.' 24 "I will take nothing except what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their share." (NASB-77)
Was that Levitical tithing? Of course not; the nation of Israel and the tribe of Levi did not even exist at that time, nor had the Old Covenant been made yet.
Again, a note: The tithe was not a part of what originally was agreed upon at Sinai when the Old Covenant was made. The tithe was an addition that came afterwards. The "book of the covenant", which was read in the hearing on the Israelites before they said "yes" to that covenant and its rules, did not mention a tithe or any special role for the tribe of Levi. Those things were added, after the original agreement. And anyway, the Old Covenant was one thing and the New Covenant is another. For more on the two covenants, old and new, look under the heading "Covenants" on the index-page keyw-c4.htm.
The truth is that there is no record or even an indication in the Bible of that the patriarch Jacob would ever have tithed. The Bible records that he promised (apparently, of his own free will) to give a tenth of certain things, if the Lord would give them to him. When one carefully looks at that matter, one notices that there were many "ifs" in what Jacob said (Genesis 28:20, et cetera), and then, it is important to check what it actually was that Jacob promised to give.
In order to find out what that was all about, one must read the context, that is, one must check what the Lord had promised to Jacob. It was land: The land of Canaan (Genesis 28:13). That is what the Lord had promised to Jacob, and it was of (the produce of) that land that Jacob promised to give a tenth part "back" to the Lord.
Why Jacob promised such a thing, we cannot know. Possibly that was only his eagerness to get something; like saying, "If you really give me a buck as you promised, I'll give you a dime in return." Or, perhaps he viewed that promised land as a "lease", with a rent to be paid. But, whatever Jacob's motives may have been, the Bible record shows that before Jacob had promised anything, the Lord had already promised to give that land to Jacob, freely, without any demands of "payment".
Now, to the core of the matter: Did the man Jacob ever receive that land, as his personal and sole property? No, he did not. For a time, he lived in that land as a stranger, among its original inhabitants, but he never gained ownership or control of what the Lord had promised (the Promised Land). It was only much later, that the nation Jacob (Israel) [I] received that land, and became its owner. That is: Only Jacob's descendants were given what the Lord had promised. The biblical record shows that it was when Jacob's descendants began to take possession of that land, that tithing began. There is more on this, under the two following headings.
[I] "Jacob" is synonymous with "Israel". How Jacob came to be called Israel, is recorded in Genesis 32:28.
The biblical record indicates that tithing began only after the Israelites had entered the Promised Land.
Again – the Old Covenant's tithe was only on the agricultural produce of the Promised Land ("the land of Canaan"). When the Israelites were in the wilderness, they were not in that land and did not cultivate fields. Instead, they ate manna.
(A side-note: The essay eo06f.htm shows where the forty-year wilderness wandering really took place, and where Mount Sinai actually was located.)
In the wilderness, even the Tent (the portable sanctuary) was produced by the help of freewill gifts and voluntary work.
And again, the tenth part that Jacob had promised to give to the Lord (but never gave personally, as far as we can see), was related to the land which he had been promised – on the practical level, the produce of that land. This leads to the next point.
Let us first consider the account of what the patriarch Jacob actually had made a "contract" about. We read:
Genesis 28:20 Then Jacob made a vow, saying, "If God will be with me and will keep me on this journey that I take, and will give me food to eat and garments to wear, 21 and I return to my father's house in safety, then the LORD will be my God. 22 "And this stone, which I have set up as a pillar, will be God's house; and of all that Thou dost give me I will surely give a tenth to Thee." (NASB-77, highlighting added)
Again, those things were related to the land which the Lord had promised to give to Jacob. The tithe or tenth was taken of what that land gave – of its agricultural produce. What the Israelites themselves made or produced, was not tithable. Craftsmen did not tithe, nor did wage workers.
The Lord's promise (which, as far as we can see, had no tithe attached to it) is recorded a bit earlier, here:
Genesis 28:13 And behold, the LORD stood above it and said, "I am the LORD, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie, I will give it to you and to your descendants. (NASB-77, highlighting added)
So, it was a land that Jacob was to be given – for free, as far as we can see – and it was a tithe or tenth part (of the produce) of that land that Jacob for some reason promised to give in return.
A side-note: Verse 15 contains the words "I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you" (NASB-77). Obviously, that must be understood, on the temporal human level of existence, to refer to Jacob the nation rather than to Jacob the man.
Then, we have Deuteronomy 12 which shows how tithing began, and when. That passage records how Moses (who was never allowed to enter the Promised Land), gave instructions to the Israelites, regarding what they were to do after they had entered the Promised Land, in contrast to what they had done before that.
Deuteronomy 12:8 "You shall not at all do as we are doing here today—every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes—9 "for as yet you have not come to the rest and the inheritance which the LORD your God is giving you. 10 "But when you cross over the Jordan and dwell in the land which the LORD your God is giving you to inherit, and He gives you rest from all your enemies round about, so that you dwell in safety, 11 "then there will be the place where the LORD your God chooses to make His name abide. There you shall bring all that I command you: your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the heave offerings of your hand, and all your choice offerings which you vow to the LORD. (NKJV)
Verse 9, "for as yet you have not come to the rest and the inheritance which the Lord your God is giving you". Because of that, certain things were not applicable yet.
Verse 10: "But when you cross over the Jordan and dwell in the land which the Lord your God is giving you to inherit" – it was at that time that things changed.
In short: The ancient Israelites did not tithe during the wilderness wandering, because they had not yet received the land that had been promised. But, as soon as they entered that Promised Land and began using the fruits of its agricultural produce, tithing began.
(As to what applied to those Israelites who settled east of Jordan – which is to say, actually outside the Promised Land – the biblical record does not tell us this.)
A side-note: Deuteronomy 12:9 which was quoted above, mentions the words "rest" and "inheritance", in connection with the land of promise. There is a symbolism in that, in regard to things connected to the New Covenant. For instance Hebrews 4:8-9 refers to a similar "Rest" (or Inheritance, or Promised Land) – however, one in the heavenly realm. The essays ex11b.htm and eb05b.htm have more on this.
In the 1769 KJ version, what is the first passage that mentions the word "tithe" in the singular form? Leviticus 27:30. What is it called there? "The tithe of the land" – that is, a tenth part of the agricultural produce of the land which the Lord had promised to give to Jacob.
Some bible-versions "make more" out of certain Hebrew words than what those words actually mean. But in the following translations, the matter at hand has been considered more carefully:
Deuteronomy 12:1 'These are the statutes and the judgments which ye observe to do in the land which Jehovah, God of thy fathers, hath given to thee to possess it, all the days that ye are living on the ground [...] (YLT, highlighting added)
Deuteronomy 12:1 And these are the ordinances and the judgments, which ye shall observe to do in the land, which the Lord God of your fathers gives you for an inheritance, all the days which ye live upon the land. (LXXE, highlighting added)
Deuteronomy 12:1 "These are the laws and regulations you must obey as long as you live in the land the LORD, the God of your ancestors, is giving you. (NLT-96, highlighting added)
Point: It was not "the Earth" but "the land" or "the ground". That is, for instance tithing was connected to the Promised Land and its agricultural produce. Deuteronomy 12:1 says, "when you come into that land" and "as long as you live in that land". And, of course, one might add: Only as long as the Old Covenant was in force.
The tithe was only on what was grown in the fields and on what fruit trees gave, and in a special way also on cattle. A carpenter did not "tithe" each tenth chair he produced; a smith did not "tithe" each tenth knife he made. Wage workers did not give a tithe of their payment. It was only the Promised Land's agricultural produce that was "tithable".
More: There is no indication that such things as fish were tithed. Everyone could fish, even the Levites who did not have as much land as their brothers. It was the same with minerals (mining products, metals and so on); there was no tithe on those things. Nor was there a tithe on such things as firewood. Consider this: The Old Covenant's tithe system was connected to the fact that the Levites were not given as much agricultural land as the other tribes of Israel. The Levites only had their smaller fields around towns. That was the reason why they were entitled to receive from the other tribes a certain part of the Promised Land's agricultural produce. (A note: Even strangers – foreigners who lived in Israel and did not own land – were entitled to a part of it, along with widows and fatherless children. See for instance Deuteronomy 14:29, 16:11-14 and 26:11-13 with context; see even Malachi 3:5.)
Again, the concept of demanding a "tithe" on wages was invented in the Middle Ages, by the Catholic Church. It has nothing to do with the Bible. In all simplicity, that is the truth about tithing of the kind that preachers and churches talk about today.
Often, when preachers tell people to give money to the preacher, they quote Malachi 3:9 and 10.
Malachi 3:9 You are cursed with a curse: for you have robbed me, even this whole nation. 10 Bring you all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in my house, and prove me now herewith, said the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. (AKJV)
Many preachers cite that passage; they want people to believe that if they give money to the preacher, they will be "blessed", and that if they do not give money to the preacher, they will be "cursed".
When one does a closer analysis of this matter, one will notice that those preachers fail to mention certain things, such as these:
Even though the book of Malachi contains certain prophecies regarding times and events that were to come, the facts remain that the message recorded in Malachi 3:9-10 was not written to or regarding people of our day. No, that message was directed to ancient Israelites, in Old Covenant days, and the whole matter was connected to the agricultural produce of the Promised Land (Canaan).
(It is important to always check, and then in keep in mind, who really is being addressed, in each bible-passage. The essay eg02c.htm has more on this.)
In short: Malachi 3:9-10 has nothing to do with things or people of our day. For more on the different aspects of the "tithe question", see the other parts of this present essay.
Some talk about "first tithe", "second tithe" and "third tithe". But how many tithes were there? One, or three as some have claimed?
Let us first note that Jacob had promised the Lord only one tithe. And again, that tithe (tenth part, 10 percent) was only on what the Promised Land produced; the tithe was on agricultural produce, but not on wages or handicraft or wood, fish, minerals or the like. (By the way, it was the producer, the farmer, who set aside the tithe; the consumer did not do that.)
And then, let us also note that the Old Covenant's original deal where first-fruits and first-born sons were to be given into the Lord's service, was replaced by one tithe, not three.
Some Pharisean writers, especially Josephus, have made it seem that there were three tithes. That concept has then been read into the Bible. But, a closer study of the matter, going beyond what bible-translations make things look like, indicates that there was only a single tithe, which then was shared between the people going to Jerusalem for the Old Covenant's high days, and widows and the fatherless and the poor, and strangers (who did not own land) and the Levites.
However, since the number of tithes under the Old Covenant is totally irrelevant in regard to the New Covenant, the technicalities and the linguistics regarding how those things really were in ancient Israel, will not be studied in any more detail here.
The essay ec11c.htm sorts out the claim by some that the New Covenant supposedly is a mere "renewal" or "modification" of the Old Covenant. For more on the two covenants, old and new, look under the heading "Covenants" in the key-word index for this site. (Regarding the Old Covenant's high days, look under the heading "High days" in that index.)
The Old Covenant had a mortal priesthood, consisting of Levites (men from the tribe of Levi). In contrast to that, the New Covenant has no "Levites" or mortal priests – it has only one priest: Jesus. The Old Covenant had a physical sanctuary with altars; the New Covenant has nothing such. The saints had elders, but those elders were not priests, and they were not paid. There is more on this, later in this essay.
A note: The churches of this world have temples, altars and mortal priests, but those things have nothing to do with the New Covenant or with the Bible. Regarding churches, see the essays ea01d.htm, ea02d.htm, ea03d.htm and eg06b.htm. The essay em05e.htm sorts out such passages as 1 Corinthians 9:14, Matthew 10:5-11 and Mark 6:7-13.
The temporary Old Covenant with its rules was only for ancient Israel, and it came to its end when Jesus was killed. A new and different covenant took its place. It was not a matter of "modifying" the Old Covenant. No, that covenant came to its full and final end. And, a new and different covenant was launched. The apostle Paul wrote about this, in his letter to the Jewish saints. Let us first read the AKJ version's rendering of Hebrews 7:18:
Hebrews 7:18 For there is truly a cancellation of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. (AKJV)
The Greek noun in question was athetêsis, related to the verb atheteô; those words had to do with rejecting and setting aside. Other bible-versions render athetêsis in this verse as "annulling", "cancellation", "abrogation", "voiding", "setting aside" and so on – in other words, "putting an end to". Let us check some of the context, in a translation with more modern language:
Hebrews 7:11 If indeed then perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, for the people had their law given to them in connexion with it, what need was there still that a different priest should arise according to the order of Melchisedec, and not be named after the order of Aaron? 12 For, the priesthood being changed, there takes place of necessity a change of law also. [...] 18 For a voiding of the preceding command comes about because of its weakness and unprofitableness. (LIT, highlighting added)
Many bible-versions render that passage in misleading ways and make it seem that it was a matter of "an old law being modified". But no, it was not a matter of "change of the law" as some bible-versions erroneously have in Hebrews 7:12. Instead, it was a change of law. A change from an old law, to something new and different. The Old Covenant came to its end, and a new and different covenant was launched. The essays ec10c.htm and ec11c.htm have more on this. Also the Old Covenant's system with mortal priests was voided (abolished), even though the Jews who rejected Jesus, did not realise this but continued with the old rituals until the temple was destroyed.
Thus, when the New Covenant came, many things changed for those saints who were of Jewish descent. Paul wrote about that, in his letter to the Jewish saints:
Hebrews 13:5 Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have; for he has said, "I will never fail you nor forsake you." [...] 9 Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings; for it is well that the heart be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited their adherents. 10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. (RSV, highlighting added)
Explanation of verse 10: "The Tent", Greek tê skênê, was a symbolic name that was used of God's "house" or dwelling. The reason for that is that during the wilderness wandering and even for a long time after that, the sanctuary was a portable thing, like a large tent. As a consequence of that, even the temple which was built much later, was sometimes called "the Tent".
("Tent" was tabernaculum in Latin. For more on why the Old Covenant's sanctuary was called "Tent" – Hebrew ohel, cukkah, cikkuwth, cok or sok, Greek skênê, Latin tabernaculum, look under the heading "Tent" on the index-page keyw-t1.htm.)
But here (Hebrews 13:10), the apostle Paul used the phrase tê skênê, "the Tent", as a symbolical reference to God's New Covenant "house" or dwelling – that is, the saints in whom God now dwelled through his Holy Spirit. The saints were (formed) God's New Covenantal "house", "temple" or "tent".
Further, still regarding verse 10: The phrase oi tê skênê latreuontes, "those who serve the tent", referred to the apostles and other elders in their serving function in the saints' fellowships. Paul even used the word "altar" (thusiastêrion), but that was symbolic language. Again, the New Covenant has no physical sanctuaries or altars. The point Paul was making was that the New Covenant does not have a mortal priesthood with a right to "live of the altar", the way it had been with the Old Covenant.
The change of priesthood (Hebrews 7:12, quoted above) was not a change from one mortal priesthood to another mortal priesthood. No, it was a change to Jesus as the High priest (and the only priest). The Old Covenant had mortal priests; the New Covenant does not. The saints had only one priest, Jesus, and he needs no "tithe" for his support. The apostles and other elders were not priests.
A note: Elders were not priests, and being an elder was not a "full-time" duty. The New Testament shows that among the saints, each fellowship could elect several (multiple) elders who then shared whatever duties there were for elders. In other words: Elders had each their own employment through which they supported themselves and their families (unless they were elderly and past working age). The elder-duties were something that they took care of, in addition to their employments. It was the same with the apostles; for instance Paul made a special point of the fact that he had always supported himself. (Yes, when Paul was imprisoned and could not support himself, he received some help from certain saints. Also, it appears that sometimes when he was sick, he may have received some help.) Other essays at this site deal with a number of "money-related" bible-passages that preachers often twist. Look under the heading "Silver and gold" on the index-page keyw-s5.htm.
Also: The saints had no churches (sanctuaries, temples), or altars. All the sacrificing had already been performed by Jesus; there remained no more offerings to be done ("offerings" is the same as sacrifices). Paul's use of the word "altar" in Hebrews 13:10 was only symbolic language; as was explained above, his point was that the New Covenant does not have mortal priests who could "live of the altar".
Again, in Hebrews 13:10 the phrase oi tê skênê latreuontes, "those who serve the tent", referred to the apostles and other elders in their serving function among the saints who were God's New Covenant "Tent" or "Temple". Paul's point simply was that elders had no right "to eat of the altar", the way the Levites had had. The elders in the saints' assemblies were not priests, nor were they "new Levites".
A note: Many preachers twist the above-quoted passage (Hebrews 13:5-9-10) and try to explain it away, but if one holds to the facts and to honesty, the matter is solidly clear. Paul's point was that elders had no right to "eat of the altar" the way the Old Covenant's Levites did. Serving as an elder was not a paid function. For more on this, see the other parts of this essay, and look also under the heading "Silver and gold" on the index-page keyw-s5.htm. (A note: Many preachers twist even 1 Corinthians 9:13-14. The essay em05e.htm sorts out that passage and matter.)
Now, there nevertheless remained for the saints "sacrificing" of a certain kind (Hebrews 13:15), and even "giving" (Hebrews 13:16). It is important to carefully consider the context of what Paul wrote:
Hebrews 13:5 Keep your life free from love of money, and be content with what you have; for he has said, "I will never fail you nor forsake you." [...] 9 Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings; for it is well that the heart be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited their adherents. 10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. [...] 13 Therefore let us go forth to him outside the camp and bear the abuse he endured. 14 For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city which is to come. 15 Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. 16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. (RSV)
There is much to note and learn in that passage. Let us consider it one more time.
For the first, Paul wrote, "keep your life free from love of money" (Hebrews 13:5). (The essay em08c.htm takes a closer look at the words "the love of money is a root of all these evils", in 1 Timothy 6:10.)
Then, he wrote, "do not be led away [do not be deceived] by diverse and strange [false] teachings" (Hebrews 13:9).
Further, he explained that elders (who served the New Covenant's "tent"), had no right to a tithe or payment (Hebrews 13:10).
Hebrews 13:9 Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings; for it is well that the heart be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited their adherents. 10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. (RSV, highlighting added)
A note: In the sentence "we have an altar" in verse 10, the word "we" reflected the fact that the saints formed God's New Covenant "house" (dwelling). Even the phrase "the tent" in that same verse pointed to that. And, as was explained above, Paul used the word "altar" in a symbolic way. The saints had no literal altars.
Under the Old Covenant there had been a mortal priesthood who had had a right "to eat of the altar", but the apostle explained that with the New Covenant, things were different: There was no right "to eat of the altar", as Paul expressed it.
"Tent" and those who "served the tent" (Hebrews 13:10, quoted above): As was explained earlier, Paul made an analogy and spoke about elders, in their serving function among the saints. With the New Covenant, God's "tent" – dwelling – was not a physical house (building). Instead, he dwelled in the saints, through his Holy Spirit. In other words: The saints were the New Covenant's "tent" (God's dwelling or "temple"). Thus, by that word "tent" (verse 10, as quoted above), Paul referred to the saints, and his words "those who serve the tent" (same verse) referred to elders in the saints' fellowships. In other words: Paul used symbolic language and an analogy, in order to make the point that elders had no right to a tithe or payment. (Some might ask, "Does not even the New Covenant have a tithe?" That question will be sorted out under the next main heading.)
But there remained "sacrificing", noted Paul. That is, by the mouth and by the heart, offering thanks and praise to God (Hebrews 13:15). Also, there was even giving: The saints were to share their resources with others, by helping the poor and sharing with the needy (Hebrews 13:16). And no, those things did not refer to giving money to some elder or preacher.
A note: The apostle Paul wrote to the Jewish saints, "So let us go forth to Him outside the camp bearing His reproach" (Hebrews 13:13, LIT). That could eventually refer to certain things in the Old Covenant's rituals, but even those things pointed to Jesus who was crucified outside the inner city wall. The "bearing of his reproach" obviously refers to the fact that Jesus was humiliated, tortured and spit upon, and that he was taken out from the inner city and then killed. There is also Matthew 27:32, Mark 15:21 and Luke 23:26 which record how a certain Simon of Cyrene had to [help Jesus to] bear his cross, to the execution place which was "outside the camp", outside the inner city wall. (John 19:17 indicates that at first, Jesus himself carried the cross.) See also Matthew 10:38 which records how Jesus said to his disciples, "And he who does not take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me". All this is connected to the following verse, Hebrews 13:14, which records how Paul told those Jewish saints, "for here we have no permanent city, but are looking for the City that is to be" (20CNT). The Old Covenant had its earthly city and its Levitical priesthood, but the New Covenant has neither an earthly city nor mortal priests. The City the saints were looking forward to, was the heavenly Jerusalem.
Another note: The essay eo03d.htm has more on the dogma about a supposed "common priesthood of all believers". The essays eb05b.htm, ex11b.htm and eb04c.htm have more on what the Bible really says about the saints and Heaven.
If one reads Matthew 23, the whole chapter, one will see that Jesus castigated the Pharisees. He said that the Pharisees' teachings were deadly, and that they caused their own disciples to become bound for gehenna. He said that the Pharisees closed people out from the Reign of Heaven. Several times, he condemned the Pharisees and warned people against their poisonous teachings.
But, many people have been caused to ignore that and instead stare at single verses taken out of their context – such as this one:
Matthew 23:2 saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses (NASB-77)
Some other versions have "the scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat", but that is misleading. The Greek text indicates that the Pharisees had "seated themselves", as if they supposedly had some "seat of Moses". They did not have any such seat, but they acted as if they did. The essay eo12c.htm has more on this.
But, did Jesus "commend" the Pharisees for tithing, as some have claimed? (This has to do with Matthew 23:23.) In other words: Did Jesus teach tithing?
The Greek verb in question (Matthew 23:23) was apodekatoô. It is important to consider the use of that word in the New Testament. In Hebrews 7:5, the 1769 KJ version correctly renders apodekatoô as "taking a tithe", that is, exacting or demanding a tithe from others. (See also the use of apodekatoô in that same manner, in the Greek Septuagint translation, in 1 Samuel 8:15-17.)
So, did the Pharisees set aside a tithe of agricultural products, or did they instead demand that others were to set aside a tithe? Here, it is important to remember that it was always the farmer who was to set aside the tithe, not the consumer.
Here is the BBE translation of the passage in question:
Matthew 23:23 A curse is on you, scribes and Pharisees, false ones! for you make men give a tenth [apodekatoô] of all sorts of sweet-smelling plants [...] (BBE, comment added)
However, the BBE version does not get the rest of that verse right. Here is another translation:
Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, actors, because you exact a tithe of the mint and the dill and the cummin – and leave aside the weightier things of the Law: Justice, and mercy, and faith. It was those things [J] that you should have done, instead of leaving them [J] aside. (Author's tr.)
[J] "Those things" and "them" = justice, mercy and faith (or faithfulness); those were the things the Pharisees should have done.
There is a similar account in the book of Luke:
Luke 11:42 But a curse is on you, Pharisees! for you make men give a tenth [apodekatoô] of every sort of plant, and give no thought to right and the love of God [...] (BBE, comment added)
Luke 11:42 But woe unto you, Pharisees! Because you exact a tithe on mint and rue and every herb – and pass over justice and the love of God. It is those things [K] that you should have done, instead of leaving them [K] aside. 43 Woe unto you Pharisees, because you love the front seats in the synagogues and the salutations in the market places. 44 Woe unto you, for you are like concealed tombs and the people who walk over them are unaware of that." (Author's tr.)
[K] "Those things" and "them" = having justice and the love of God; those were the things the Pharisees should have done, instead of demanding tithes even on herbs.
So, Jesus did not "commend" the Pharisees, neither for exacting the old covenantal tithe even on small herbs, nor for anything else. What Jesus did was that he condemned the Pharisees, castigated them, ridiculed them, and warned people about their teachings, saying that they were deadly. He asked the Pharisees how they thought that they would be able to escape the judgment of Gehenna (Matthew 23:33).
Considering all those facts: Matthew 23 and the Pharisees' manner of exacting (demanding) a tithe even on herbs, are totally irrelevant in regard to the "tithe question" that we are talking about here.
No, he did not. There is no mention of anything of that kind in Paul's letters. And, he had no such right. Read on:
Did Paul ever receive tithes? No, he did not. That would have been wrong, for several reasons, among them the fact that he was of the tribe of Benjamin and thus not a Levite; he had no right to a tithe according to the Old Covenant's rules.
Simply: Paul, a man who in his earlier life had been trained by Pharisees, knew the Old Covenant's law. He knew that he could not "claim a tithe". Had he done that, the Jews probably would have stoned him as a deceiver and heretic, because only the Levites (and widows and the fatherless and the poor and strangers) had a right to receive support through the tithe system. And, all those things were connected to the Old Covenant. Once again: The New Covenant has neither a mortal priesthood nor a tithe system.
The claim that the apostle Paul supposedly "upheld his right to live on tithes" has no basis in the Bible. It is total nonsense, a plain fabrication.
Some preachers have claimed that Paul supposedly taught that "preachers are to be paid, twice as large wages as others". They have based that claim on how certain bible-versions render 1 Timothy 5:17. However, in that part of his letter to Timothy, Paul was explaining how the saints were to take care of, not elders but the elderly, aged people. He taught that the saints were to provide old people no longer were able to work, with what in our day would be called "a pension". But, the way many bible-translations render things, that may not be fully clear at first glance.
The essay em07b.htm sorts out 1 Timothy 5:17. The essay em05e.htm takes a closer look at 1 Corinthians 9:14 and what the Lord really had "ordained". And again, the essays em02c.htm and em03c.htm have more on what the apostle Paul actually taught regarding elders in the saints' assemblies, and money and related things.
In the beginning of this essay, it was asked whether tithing is right or wrong, biblical or unbiblical, in the light of the New Covenant. The answer to that question was given earlier in this essay, many times over. But, let us consider a passage in the apostle Paul's letter to Thessalonica. There, he was relaying to all a command from Jesus, regarding certain things.
In Jesus' name, Paul told those saints to take heed of certain things. In other words: He was relaying a command from the Lord. He wrote (please carefully read all of the following quote):
2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command [L] you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus the Anointed, to withdraw yourselves from every brother who leads an idle life, instead of living according to the instruction you received from us. 7 For you know in what way you should imitate us, because we did not behave disorderly among you, 8 nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it; rather, with labour and toil we worked night and day, so that we would not be a burden for any of you. 9 Not that we did not have the opportunity, [M] but we made ourselves a model, for you to imitate. 10 For, even when we were with you, we told you this: If someone does not want to work, neither let him eat. 11 Now, we hear that some among you are leading negligent lives, not working at all but being meddlers. 12 We charge [M] and exhort such persons, by our Lord Jesus the Anointed, to work in a quiet fashion, and to eat their own bread. 13 So, brothers, keep on acting in an upright way. 14 But if someone does not give attention to what we have said in this letter, note that man and have no company with him, so that he may be ashamed. 15 Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. (Author's tr.)
[L] "Command", verse 6, and "charge", verse 12 – the Greek verb in question is parangellô, para+angellô, which referred to transmitting a message from someone, to someone else. Paul's words "in the name of our Lord Jesus the Anointed" (verse 6) and "by our Lord Jesus the Anointed" (verse 12) make it clear that this was not a "private view" that Paul had, but a command from Jesus. And, as to what that command was – well, read all of the above-quoted passage once again, with thought and with care.
[M] Verse 9, the translation "not that we did not have the opportunity" – many bible-versions have put in verse 9 the word "power" or "right", but it is obvious that here, the apostle used the Greek word exousia (which had many different uses and meanings) in the signification "chance", "opportunity". Explanation: We can assume that many of the saints in Thessalonica would have gladly received Paul and his companions as guests in their homes and permitted them to stay and eat for free. So, from that viewpoint, they would have had the exousia – those people's permission and through that the opportunity – to do that. That is why that part of verse 9 was translated above as "not that we did not have the opportunity". But, Paul made it clear that he and those with him would not live at the cost of others – verse 8, "nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it".
A note: Again, the old Greek noun exousia had many different uses and meanings. It was derived from the word exesti which meant such things as "it is right", "let", "permissible", "permitted", "it is allowed", "it is in one's power", "it is possible". Bible-translators have not always given exousia the meaning which is correct for the context. Again, there is more on that word, in the second footnote towards the end of this essay.
Let us once again read the context:
2 Thessalonians 3:7 For you know in what way you should imitate us, because we did not behave disorderly among you, 8 nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it; rather, in labour and toil we worked night and day, so that we would not be a burden for any of you. 9 Not that we did not have the opportunity, [N] but we made ourselves a model, for you to imitate. 10 For, even when we were with you, we told you this: If someone does not want to work, neither let him eat. (Author's tr.)
[N] The translation "not that we did not have the opportunity" and the word exousia in the Greek text of verse 9 are explained elsewhere in this essay. The essays em05e.htm and em07b.htm sort out what the words tê exousia mou en tô euangeliô in the Greek text of 1 Corinthians 9:18 really mean and refer to.
Again: We can assume that many generous saints and believers in Thessalonica would have allowed Paul to stay and eat for free, without paying for those things. However, because of what Jesus had commanded, Paul did not do that but instead established a firm example that all able-bodied males should earn their own sustenance through having employments (as craftsmen and similar), just as Paul himself had done. Paul told all to follow the example he and his companion or companions had set in that regard.
2 Thessalonians 3:6-15 and several other passages in Paul's letters and in the book of Acts show what Paul's example was: That of not living at the cost of others. Paul warned about men of a different kind, deceivers who would not follow his example. He mentioned the deception which those deceivers spread:
1 Timothy 6:5 perverse disputings [O] of men of corrupt understanding, and destitute of the truth, using piety as a source of gain: from such withdraw thyself. (JB-2000)
[O] "Disputings": The old Greek wording in question actually referred to "grinding", as a reference to endless argumentation, in this case in connection with using religion as a source of gain. The essay em08c.htm has more on this, and on 1 Timothy 6:5-12 in general.
What kind of people were the saints told to withdraw from, to deny fellowship to? The essay ea10c.htm has more on that matter and shows that often, money (or some healthy person's effort to live at the cost of others) was a factor in that connection.
An important note: On the other hand, Jesus and Paul as well the other apostles taught that those who could work, were to take care of those who could not. The essays em07b.htm, eb12b.htm and eb13e.htm have more on this.
Many bible-versions contain a number of other "enhanced" passages that have been rendered (twisted) so that they give seeming support to preachers' demands for money. The essays em02c.htm, em03c.htm, em04c.htm, em05e.htm, ee05b.htm, em06d.htm, em07b.htm, em08c.htm, em09c.htm and em10b.htm have more on what Paul really taught regarding monetary things in connection with the saints' fellowships. Please also read the essay eb13e.htm which considers what Jesus actually meant by the words "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (Matthew 6:21 and Luke 12:34).
Footnotes
1) For those who are interested in linguistics: On the root and origin (etymology) of the English language word 'tithe', and on certain Greek and Hebrew tithe- and tithing-related words.
It is thought that the English language word "tithe" has its roots in the Old English teogotha (Anglian) and teotha (West Saxon), both with the meaning "a tenth part".
In the New Testament, the Greek word for "tithe" was dekatê, dekatos which simply meant "tenth" ("a tenth part"). The related verbs dekatoô and apodekatoô were used of both "taking a tithe" (receiving or demanding a tithe from others), as well as of setting aside a tenth part of something. The use of the verb apodekatoô in the meaning "receiving a tithe" (or, sometimes, "demanding a tithe") can be seen, in addition to Matthew 23:23, Luke 11:42 and Hebrews 7:5, also in the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Old Testament, in 1 Samuel 8:15-17. The two-fold meaning and use of the shorter form dekatoô can be seen by comparing the Greek texts of Hebrews 7:6 and 7:9.
In the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the corresponding verb was asar. Even it was used of both setting apart a tithe as well as of taking (receiving) a tithe. The related noun maaser (ma'aser) simply meant "a tenth part".
In Malachi 3:10, the LXX translates ma'aser as ekphoria (ekphorion). The word ekphorion referred to what the land produced, and also to the covenanted tenth part of that land's (agricultural) produce. This use of ekphorion can be studied in the LXX in Leviticus 25:19, Deuteronomy 28:33, Judges 6:4 and Malachi 3:10. (Again, the tithe was only on agricultural produce. That was connected to the Promised Land, Canaan, and the Old Covenant.)
Regarding Malachi 3:9-10 – that passage is discussed in the main part of this essay.
2) Regarding the word exousia in the Greek text of 2 Thessalonians 3:9.
The old Greek noun exousia had many different uses and meanings. It was derived from the verb-like word construction exesti which had many different uses and meanings, such as "it is right", "let", "permissible", "permitted", "it is allowed", "it is in one's power", "it is possible". Bible-translators have not always given exousia the meaning which is correct for the context.
Here is what the "Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon" by Liddell and Scott has on the verb-construction exesti (which is the root of the noun exousia):
exesti imperat. exestô subj. exêi opt. exeiê inf. exeinai part. exon imperf. exên fut. exestai opt. exesoito [impers., the only forms in use of ex-eimi] it is allowed, it is in one's power, is possible, c. inf., Hdt.: c. dat. pers. et inf., id=Hdt., attic; ex. soi andri genesthai Xen.:— c. acc. pers. et inf., Ar.:—part. neut. absol., exon since it was possible, Hdt., Aesch., etc.
That was the verb exesti. Its derivative, the noun exousia, had many different uses and meanings, among them "power", "a right", "power of choice", "liberty of doing as one pleases", "permission", "chance", and so on. In the case of 2 Thessalonians 3:9 which is quoted in this essay, it is obvious that Paul used exousia in the meaning "chance", "opportunity". Explanation: We can assume that the saints in Thessalonica were generous and would have gladly permitted Paul and his companions to stay and eat for free. So, from that viewpoint, they would have had the exousia – those people's permission and through that the opportunity – to do that. That is why that part of 2 Thessalonians 3:9 was in this essay translated as "not that we did not have the opportunity". But, the Lord had given Paul an instruction, and so he and his companions made themselves examples of how things were to be. Paul reminded the saints in Thessalonica about how they had acted: "Nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it" (2 Thessalonians 3:8). Also, verse 10, Paul told them that "if anyone will not work, neither let him eat". (Obviously, that applied to able-bodied men who were in working age and had a sound mind. Other passages in the NT show that the saints were told to take care of the aged people, and of those who were sick either in body or in mind.)
A note: In the Greek text of 1 Corinthians 9:18, we find a different use of the many-faceted word exousia, in the phrase tê exousia mou en tô euangeliô, "my authority in the Gospel". The essay em05e.htm sorts out the meaning of that passage.
By the way, regarding 2 Thessalonians 3:9 – the Latin Vulgate version translates the Greek wording ouch oti ouk echomen exousian into Latin as non quasi non habuerimus potestatem. Just as the Greek noun exousia, the Latin potestatem had many different uses and meanings, such as "power", "strength", "ability", "opportunity" and "chance". In the case of 2 Thessalonians 3:9, the correct translation of both potestatem and exousia is "chance", "opportunity".
Table of contents – What's new here? – Key-word index – Search function – Goal and purpose – Contact, comment, question
If this page did not contain what you were looking for, see the links below, and the key-word index and the table of contents, or use the search function.
Additional reading at the Bible Pages, on related as well as other issues:
A clarifying explanation of the short names for the bible-versions quoted or mentioned at this site, such as that NKJV stands for New King James Version, YLT for Young's Literal translation, HCSB for Holman Christian Standard Bible, NRSV for the New Revised Standard Version, and so on. → es09c.htm
For those who are interested: A printable, bible-based word-search puzzle with words related to the "tithe question". → puzzle32-p.pdf – A large print version, and many more bible-based word-mazes. → ep01.htm
Acts 20:35 – what did the apostle Paul mean when he said to the elders from Ephesus, "it is more blessed to give than to receive", and when he said to them, "I have shown you in everything, by working like this, that we must support the infirm"? → em02c.htm
On the example the apostle Paul set, for others to imitate. Paul did not tell people to "follow him as a leader"; what he did was that he told the saints to imitate him, to copy his example. It is important for believers to know what kind of example Paul referred to and meant, and in what connection. → em03c.htm
For more essays on monetary things in connection with religious fellowships, look also under the heading "Silver and gold" on the index-page keyw-s5.htm.
Jesus warned his disciples about false prophets, teachers of falsehood, deceivers and deception. He said that many would be deceived. → eo09e.htm
The route of the Exodus, and the location of Mount Sinai. Which part of the Red Sea did the Israelites cross over – the Gulf of Suez, or the Gulf of Aqaba? Or, was it "a reed sea" as some have claimed? Also, where did they spend the forty years of wilderness wandering? → eo06f.htm
A clarification of the actual nature of the sabbatismos or Rest of Hebrews 4:9. → ex11b.htm
The Promises spoken to Abraham, and the saints' heavenly Rest and Inheritance. How the earthly Land of Israel symbolised and foreshadowed a Promised Land in Heaven. Also, how the words Promise, Inheritance, Rest and Land in certain bible passages point to the same thing. → eb05b.htm
What does the Bible say about Heaven? What does it look like? Were the saints to go there, and if so, for how long? What about others? → eb04c.htm
Check your bible knowledge. A basic self-test with 15 biblical questions (with answers and commentary). → es04b.htm
How to understand the Bible. Easy keys to interpreting and understanding Scripture in a better and deeper way, by avoiding certain fundamental but common mistakes and errors in bible study. These vital keys are really the basics for objective bible study. Knowing these keys will make many things easier to interpret and comprehend, and one will see several central matters in the Bible from a new and different perspective, especially in connection with the Gospels and the Epistles. → eg02c.htm
Is the New Covenant a "renewal" or "modification" of the Old Covenant? → ec11c.htm
Galatians 3:17-19 – what did Paul mean by the term "added law"? What was the original thing? And, the addition that came 430 years later, was it some "extra rituals", or something else? Further: What did the apostle Paul mean when he in that same epistle wrote, "This is the only thing I want to find out from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?" (3:2) and, "Tell me, you who want to be under the Law, do you not understand the Law?" (4:21). Those things in the letter to the saints in Galatia might seem confusing, but this essay makes them clearer and more easily understood, and shows what the apostle was talking about. → ec10c.htm
For more on the Old Covenant and the New Covenant, look under the heading "Covenants" on the index-page keyw-c4.htm.
Matthew 16:18, "I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it". What was Jesus talking about? What is the immortal assembly or ekklêsia which he said he would form, and where is it located? Is it an earthly religious organisation in this world – a church – or is it a heavenly assembly that has as its members the saints who have become immortals? → ea01d.htm
The origin and meaning of the word "church". → eg06b.htm
What does Galatians 4:26 mean? It talks about the heavenly Jerusalem and is a part of an allegory regarding the two covenants. Why have some preachers then claimed that it refers to some church? This essay finds the facts regarding the allegory of Galatians 4:21-31, and shows what the different things named in it pictured and symbolised. → ea02d.htm
Church eras – do they exist? Are there seven "eras of the Church", as some have claimed – "Sardis era", "Philadelphian era", "Laodicean era" and so on? Is there any biblical basis for that dogma? The question in a nutshell: The seven assemblies mentioned in Revelation 2 and 3 – were they contemporary assemblies of saints in the days of John (as the book of Revelation describes them), or are they, as some have claimed, successive "eras of the Church of God" that exist in later times and continue to our day? → ea03d.htm
Are modern-day believers a "royal priesthood", or "kings and priests", as some have claimed? How should one understand 1 Peter 2:4-9 and other related passages? → eo03d.htm
1 Corinthians 9:14, Even so has the Lord ordained that they who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel. What did Jesus and the apostle Paul really mean? Should preachers be paid? A study on 1 Corinthians 9:14, Matthew 10:5-11 and Mark 6:7-13. → em05e.htm
On Titus 1:15 and the translation "to the pure all things are pure", and what the apostle Paul really meant and referred to. → ee05b.htm
Regarding the Old Covenant's high days, look under the heading "High days" in the key-word index for this site.
What does the Bible say about the Pharisees? Also, why did Jesus call them vipers, snakes and actors? → eo12c.htm
How the saints took care of widows, the elderly, the sick and the needy. Also, special comments on 1 Timothy 5:17. → em07b.htm
What the Bible says about excommunication, marking and avoiding. Additionally, some notes on the words and concepts "heresy" and "heretic". → ea10c.htm
Religion must not be skin-deep only. Believers must take the matters of faith seriously. → eb12b.htm
Luke 12:34 and Matthew 6:21, "For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also". What does that mean? What was Jesus talking about? → eb13e.htm
Does Galatians 6:6 mean that believers should give money to preachers? Is that what Paul was saying? → em04c.htm
What does the word "burdensome" in 1 Thessalonians 2:6 really refer to – was Paul talking about money, or about something else? → em06d.htm
A study on the phrases "the snare of the Devil" and "the love of money is the root of all evil" (1 Timothy 3:7 and 6:9-10 and 2 Timothy 2:26). On Jesus' and Paul's teachings regarding how those who proclaimed the Gospel or Good Message could become spiritually unfruitful. → em08c.htm
2 Corinthians 11:8, "I robbed other churches, taking wages of them". What does that verse mean? Did Paul receive wages for his proclaiming work, as some translations make it seem? → em09c.htm
On Philippians 4:14-18 and what the words "communicate" and "communicated" in that passage refer to. → em10b.htm
Info on the goal and purpose of this site, and a contact address.
→
purpose.htm
Table of contents for this site, including a synopsis or a short, summary description
of each essay or article. →
filename.htm
Search for specific words, phrases or bible passages at this site. →
search.htm
An alphabetical bible topic keyword index of the essays and articles at this site:
1-9
– A
– B
– C
– D
– E
– F
– G
– H
– I
– J
– K
– L
– M
– N
– O
– P
– Q
– R
– S
– T
– U
– V
– W
– X
– Y – Z –
Detailed index overview
If you find any of the essays or treatises at this site interesting and helpful, please provide a copy to other people as well. But before printing or distributing anything, make sure to get the very latest version, exactly as it is, directly from this web site. In regard to printable copies of these pages, for example as PDF-format papers, booklets or brochures or so – there are no specially printer friendly variants (except some bible puzzles), nor is there a need for that – simply, when you print an essay, set the margins and the text size to fit your needs and the paper you use, in the program you use for viewing these pages, and then send it to your printer. (This varies in different browsers and word processing programs. In web browsers, for setting the margin size and headers and footers, look for "Print Format" in the File menu; to set the text size for print-out, look under "Preview" or "View" in the same menu.)
Important: You are welcome to quote the documents at this site – the Bible Pages – provided that you mention the source, by giving the full web address to the page in question. Please link to these essays and give copies to friends. However, you may not re-publish any part of the contents of this site, as a booklet, brochure or on the Internet or in other ways, without a permission from the author; he retains the copyright. For more on copying and quoting, and a few words about the author and his religious education and credentials, see the page purpose.htm.
The essays at this site are not in "bible lesson" or "bible study course" format, nor are they meant as on-line "bible study classes" of some kind. Even though this site gives ready answers to biblical questions of many kinds, its main goal is providing food for thought on a variety of biblical subjects, and challenging and encouraging people to get started with deep personal bible study and then continue with that. (Many religious organisations and denominations have their bible lessons and correspondence courses; they are ready-made "studies" which are shrewdly constructed and written in such a manner that they lead the reader to conclusions that fit the dogmas of the group in question.) A careful, closer study of the books of the Bible with proper tools will help a believer to gain better and deeper biblical understanding. In that way, one will find out more about what the Bible really says, means and teaches. One can then, with wisdom, use that knowledge as a guide for one's life, instead of accepting as "biblical truths" whatever commercial religion – churches and their ministers (preachers) – have taught and want people to believe.
A more thorough, bible-based study with care and with thought will, not only help one to learn more, but also show one how many a popular belief has no scriptural basis or support but is altogether false and not biblical at all. This applies, not only to prophecy and "end time" related things, but also to many other subjects where prevailing dogmas are often taken "for granted". For this reason, it is extremely important for believers to personally study the Writings, and to thoroughly analyse them down to the smaller details, in order to find out the real facts. For doing that, it is not necessary to know the Hebrew, Greek or Latin languages (even though learning their letters and alphabet can be a good idea); there are modern, advanced tools which can help one to study in an effective way – see the pages es01d.htm and es02c.htm for more on this. The essay eg02c.htm supplies a number of easy, elementary keys to acquiring a better and deeper understanding of the Bible, simply by consciously and methodically avoiding certain usual errors and pitfalls.
This site is non-denominational and non-sectarian. It is not connected to any church, sect or religious organisation or movement. This site looks at things from a biblical perspective, and not from a dogmatic one. It does not claim to be without error or to "know it all" or to have a perfect or complete explanation to all things – it consists of an ongoing bible study that has been made public, and as the study goes on, the contents of these pages are revised and also expanded, with new topics and themes being addressed. Readers are invited and welcome to write to the author with thoughts and comments, or to ask questions or to point out a mistake if they feel that they have found one. For more on this, see the page purpose.htm.
The address to this page is www.biblepages.web.surftown.se/em01d.htm
Please send or mention the address to this site to others, and link to these pages.
This page was created or modified 2010-02-14.