‘But Jesus endorsed tithing’

How can anyone say tithing is not applicable in the New Testament? Jesus said it should be done in Matthew 23:23.

The Bible only seems confusing because it requires a lot of hard work to know what God’s word says and means, a principal requirement for gaining divine approval (2Timothy 2:15). A statement taken out of context can be made to mean anything, a pretext for doing anything you have already set out to do regardless!

In Matthew 23, Jesus accuses the scribes and the Pharisees – folks who prided themselves on being experts on the Law – of hypocrisy (not practising what they teach), wickedness (making, binding and laying heavy burdens on others while they stand aside, refusing to lift a finger to help); eye-service (doing everything only to be seen of men); title-loving (preening in the radiance of public flattery, receiving honorary degrees, and getting called by all showy titles) and attention-seeking (fond of the best places at banquets and the front seats in the synagogues).

He tears into them (in today’s parlance): “How can you say, ‘it does not matter if you swear by the temple, but it is binding if you swear by the gold of the temple’? Hypocrites! Which is greater, the gold or the temple that makes the gold sacred? You say, ‘swearing by the altar is not a big deal but it is only binding if you swear by the gift on the altar’. Are you blind? Don’t you know that the altar that makes the gift sacred is more important than the gift?” hitting hard at their absurd interpretation of the Law. By no stretch of the imagination can we suppose that Jesus endorses swearing by the altar or the temple. (See Matthew 5:34 where He forbids swearing). In the same breath He points to their ludicrous practice of paying tithes of “even the tiniest income from your herb gardens, but you ignore the more important aspects of the law—justice, mercy, and faith. You should tithe, yes, but do not neglect the more important things.”

The scribes and Pharisees were given to overemphasizing trifling details of the Law while utterly ignoring the weightier matters with which it dealt. To tithe, under the Law, on even the cheapest of herbs, was quite right in itself. But to lay special stress on and advertise it as though indicating remarkable scrupulosity, while neglecting matters of far greater importance, indicated a conscience that was unexercised and a spirit not given to God.

How can we ever aver that Matt 23:23 is an endorsement of tithing in the New Testament? The context just does not support it.

The entire passage is about Jesus discussing matters of the Law (which included tithing) with teachers of the Law.

The LAW was the subject, and the listeners were the custodians of the law. Your argument throws up important questions bordering on our relationship with the Law (of Moses): Were we, ever, under the Law? Are we today not under the Law? How do we give as NT Believers?

As far as God is concerned, three categories of people exist on earth: Jews, Gentiles (simply a term for people of other nations) and the Church of God (1 Corinthians 10:32).  The Jews have the Law. That the Gentiles have NEVER been under the Law is clear from the following references:

Romans 2:14 (NCV): Those who are not Jews do not have the law;

Romans 3:19 (NKJV): Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law;

Ephesians 2:11-15 (ANIV): Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth [were] separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.

The Church operates ‘the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus’ (Romans 8:2) under which Giving is governed by Luke 6:38: “Give and it will be given to you. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you”. It is noteworthy that this principle, taught by Jesus Himself, was captured by Luke, a physician. He, with Gentiles in mind, set out to show that the coming of Jesus was the fulfilment of God’s promise to Adam (Mankind) in Genesis 3:15: “The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent [the devil]”, and so traced the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus, back to Adam. Matthew, on the other hand, writing to a Jewish audience, demonstrated that Jesus was the fulfilment of the various promises God made to Abraham and David. He therefore traced the paternal (as it were) genealogy of Jesus only to David and to Abraham.

New Testament living is a radical shift from the Old and requires a fundamental change in the manner of thinking passed down to us. Jesus’ revolutionary message was Repent, the kingdom of God is here. ‘Repent’ in Yoruba is ironupiwada which literally means ‘a change on the inside that results in a change of conduct and behaviour’.

You’ll agree it’s unsafe to pour new wine into old wineskins! (Matthew 9:17)

================================

First published on 28 June 2009 in my Making Sense of Life column in The Nation on Sunday, a major Nigerian newspaper.