A SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST RESPONSE

TO ALL ARGUMENTS OPPOSED TO CHRISTIANS

RETURNING TITHES AND OFFERINGS!!!
By Derrick Gillespie

*THIS FREE 2020 BOOKLET IS BEST READ WITH A LIVE INTERNET CONNECTION
 INTRODUCTION:
So many Christians lose their way over this issue, and it's time to see what the Bible really
teaches, both directly and indirectly by way of its stated commands and its implied principles.
This is an information sharing booklet, but as expressed from the perspective of a Bible
believing Seventh-day Adventist whose Church (the SDA Church) believes in returning both
tithes and offerings as an act of worship and as a practical means of material support for the
work of the church and it's leaders. Anyone who disagrees with my/our position, you reserve
that right to so do, but we will have to respectfully agree to disagree. I urge all to read and
check up on me to determine if my position in response to the naysayers is correct, or is based
on the principles seen in scripture. All quoted scripture is from the King James Version (Bible).

The presentation is laid out in a question and answer format, with a few embedded links here
and there to additional material online (*click the links whenever they do appear to be taken
to the linked articles and additional material online). Let's now delve into the often
controversial questions related to this issue of returning tithes and offerings.

QUESTION 1:
Where did the words "tithes" and "offerings" come from in Christianity? When did "tithes"
and "offerings" begin to operate, to what do they apply, and for what purpose?

ANSWER:
They both come straight from the Bible and both appear from the very first book of the Bible,
Genesis...long before there was the old covenant, the nation of Israel, the
Jews, and long before the new testament Church existed. The word "tithes"
first appeared in Genesis 14:20 to describe Abraham just doing what he
already knew beforehand to be an act of worship; that of returning "a tenth"
or "a tithe" of his goods in order to materially support a priest of God, or a
spiritual leader who represents God's cause on earth. See Genesis 14:16-20 (better yet, read
the whole chapter).

This reality in Genesis shows that returning "tithes" WAS NOT only connected to the Levites in
the nation of Israel (a tribe of priests who came many
years later after the account in Genesis 14). This
DEBUNKS the popular anti-tithing fallacy that's often
trumpeted by some that tithes was only and always
for the Levites under the old covenant in Israel (see
Numbers 18:21, 24). Well, from the scriptures we see
that this false claim could not be true, since in Genesis
14 there was no old covenant, and no nation of Israel
or no Levite around, but rather just a priest-king,
Melchizedek (“king of Salem”), who was not even a
Levite, since the Levites were descendants of Jacob or
of Abraham's grandson; a group not yet in existence until many years later! And notice how the
writer of Genesis was careful to point out why Abraham was returning tithes to Melchizedek;
i.e. not just because he was a king of the region where Abraham captured spoils of war (and
so, as some argue, Abraham was just showing ‘territorial respect’), but Melchizedek was “THE
priest of the Most High God”, and hence, as all priests of God were to be treated and
supported materially (as later explained under Israel), he was due a tithe!! That's Bible!
Secondly, we see Abraham paying "tithes of ALL" or "a tenth" of all his material increase at
that juncture (Gen. 14:20), and in this case it was the "spoils" or captured "goods" of war (see
Heb. 7:4 with Gen. 14:16, 20)...which is another reality which debunks a common fallacy
which argues erroneously that tithes was always food or farm products (i.e. animal and plant
harvest) and paid only to the Levites. Well, goods captured in war are not always only food or
farm products, but would be a wide variety of things as seized bounty (i.e. animals like horses,
camels, sheep, cattle, also food, weapons, clothes, gold, silver, precious gems, etc.), and
Abraham gave a tithe or tenth of all “goods” he captured to support the priest-king
Melchizedek who represented God on earth at the time.

Obviously tithing was a practice of his life that passed down by oral tradition, since Abraham
just happen to know of the practice, and we later see his grandson, Jacob, learning and
practicing the same in his worship of God (see Genesis 28:20-22, especially verse 22), where
he too returned "a tenth of ALL" (food, clothes, etc.) in return for all the blessings of God
throughout his lifetime...blessings which spread out for years, and was not just a one time
event! It is important to realize that at this time, Jacob had no land of his own. Thus his Genesis
28:20-22 comments must be understood to mean that Jacob expected to work for someone
and tithe on the wages received for his labor. He went to work for Laban, who changed his
wages ten times. This also debunks those who
claim that only those who own land as farmers
were to tithe. No! Tithes also were paid on
wages of whatever kind, as Jacob's story clearly
demonstrated (in his case his wages was food,
clothes, animals, etc.). And since tithes are paid
to a priest who accepts it on God's behalf, Jacob
too must have returned his tithes of all his
material blessings received throughout his
remaining life, in order to support a priest
operating in God's cause, just like Melchizedek; a reality which took place long before any
Levite came on the scene, or before the old covenant with the Jewish nation originated at
Sinai many years later in Exodus 19. That’s Bible!
This reality also debunks another false claim by some that tithes being returned by Abraham
and Jacob in Genesis was a one time event in their lives and was all voluntary. No! Abraham
was a commandment keeper (Genesis 26:5), and if paying
tithes (a structured way to return to God; not just a
voluntary unstructured free will offering), it was later
codified in writing by Moses as a principle of material
support for God's representative leaders who act in priestly
offices, then we can reasonably accept that it was one of the
instructions and commands of God guiding Abraham's life.
Abraham originally came from a pagan land, yet we see him
just happen to later know that offering animal sacrifices to
God was an act of worship, and so we can reasonably
assume that this too, just like tithing, was among the
stipulated “commandments” he received from God about
how to worship. And there is no real argument that can be
logical enough to include animal sacrifices and the principle
about sacrificing only “clean animals” (Gen. 22:13), for
instance, but exclude tithing being among those “commandments” regarding worship which
Abraham had received (Gen. 26:5)… except one is just being simply personally biased against
tithing being included, so as to support one’s anti-tithing viewpoint.
In addition, if Abraham’s grandson Jacob knew of the tithing practice (Genesis 28:22), then it
was obviously taught to Abraham's son, Isaac, who too passed it on to Jacob as a practice to
show allegiance to God in a structured way of giving to God's cause. That's how oral tradition
worked among God's people before the written law code came through Moses...just as we
saw Jacob giving up jewelry and other idols when he repented in Genesis 35:1-4, which was
also another principle seen codified later in writing. God later (in writing) prohibited idols
among and jewelry/ornaments worn by his people, both of which still remain prohibited to this
day, just as to this day acceptance with and worship of God still demands that we offer
sacrifices; but just that the true substitutionary Sacrifice now is Jesus the slain Lamb, offered
once on our behalf (Heb. 10:1, 4, 9-14), and we are now, as we look to Jesus the true Lamb in
faith to save us, still expected to “offer our bodies as living sacrifices”, i.e. as “spiritual
sacrifices” (see Romans 12:1 with Hebrews 13:15-16 and 1 Peter 2:5). This proves that in some
cases a principle can still be in force even if the format of its application may change! I will
explore that principle later in this presentation!

As for the word "offering", or "offerings", it too came straight from the Bible, and originated
in Genesis as well....and long before the old covenant, or the nation of Israel came into
existence. See for example, Gen.4:3-4, Gen. 8:20,
Gen. 22:13, Gen. 35:14. "Offering" or "offerings"
apply to anything offered to God, sometimes
personally on an altar, sometimes through God's
representative leaders to support his cause and
leaders, and included sacrifices (animals and
plant/food offerings; Exodus 20:24) food gifts
(Exodus 29:40), precious gems and metals (Exodus
25:3), money (Exodus 30:13), etc. It is the broad
term that includes even tithes offered to God, yes,
the tithe was also later called an "offering" or was
part of "offerings"; see Numbers 18:24, 28.

QUESTION 2:
Is it true that tithing was abolished in the New Testament, and only "free will offerings" in the
form of money now apply to Christians under a new covenant?

ANSWER:
False! All who present this fallacy base it on a number of misconceptions they harbor, and like a
domino effect it leads then to other fallacious interpretations and faulty conclusions. Recently I
addressed one SDA brother who lost his way over the issue (he's now rejecting tithes involving
money as valid). I said to him:

"I asked you to show one Scripture that specifically brings up tithing itself and abolished it,
and that you also failed to do. You only brought an ASSUMPTION that
because the Levitical priesthood was abolished then tithing itself is
abolished. False association and unbiblical conclusion drawn. Why?
Simple. Tithing was before the Levites so it was not only Levitical in
scope or association. When the Levitical system ended you failed to
see what happened. The Bible simply says there was A *CHANGE OF THE PRIESTHOOD AND A
CHANGE IN THE LAW RELATED TO THE PRIESTHOOD (Heb. 7:12-17); not an abolishing of all
priesthood and all laws governing priesthood. And what priesthood is now in place? The
Genesis 14: 18-24 type priesthood after the order of Melchizedek which involves Jesus as
priest governed by divine laws related to priesthood (Hebrews 7)….the very type of priesthood
that’s SUPERIOR to the Levitical priesthood, and one which IRREFUTABLY INCLUDED TITHING
practiced by Abraham the father of all Israel (i.e. the father of literal and spiritual Israel), and
whose “seed” we are today as Christians (see Gal. 3:29).

If tithing was not seen as a precedent under the Melchizedek-type priesthood ---a priesthood
that is now BIBLICALLY fully in place and replacing the Levitical system (i.e. after Jesus came
to earth, and after he is now himself the true sacrificed Lamb being offered, and after he was
installed as priest in heaven after the order of the Melchizedek type priesthood; Heb. 5:1-10)
---then I would have no ground on which to stand to defend the tithing principle in my SDA
Church. But I do, Bro X, despite all your personal OPINION and inconclusive verbiage denying it.
What tithing principle was practiced by Abraham my spiritual father (Malachi 2:10) who I
must pattern as a commandment keeper (Gen. 26:5) and true worshipper? One which gave
tithes of ALL “goods” in his possession or ALL his material increase, including even war spoils
(which was not just farm products; Heb. 7:4)….and that “ALL” from which he gave a “tenth”
means simply that… “ALL”. And a reading of the entire chapter of Genesis 14 shows that
Abraham’s type of tithing had him giving not just a non-structured free-will offering but rather a
structured “tithe *tenth+ OF ALL” from a heart of love for God who gave him commands related
to true worship (Gen. 14:20; Gen. 26:5).

I am of the view, based on the Bible, that if I pattern Abraham’s faith and practice in this regard
and freely tithe “ALL” I happen to possess at the time then as his “seed” (Gal. 3:29) I cannot be
at fault. If you want to do otherwise that’s your personal freedom, but I will “err on the side of
caution”; NOT err while refusing to pattern my father Abraham, and refusing to see that the
priesthood now in place after the order of Melchizedek is and was one which included tithing of
“ALL” in honor of God.

Jacob, the grandson of Abraham, as soon as he decided to repent of his sins in Genesis 28, and
reform his life what do we see? Him also giving a “tenth of ALL” (notice, “of ALL”) going
forward. Under the Levitical system, which only came many years later, the priesthood-
related “law” and “commands” had only farm products tithed AT THAT TIME, true, but under
the new Melchizedek-type order of priesthood that now took over, with it’s stated "CHANGE"
of the “law”, it obviously involves a tithing of “ALL” of one’s “goods” or all material increase,
just as Abraham exemplified…not just tithing food (THAT’S A “CHANGE” IF I EVER SEE ONE)."

You failed to show in Paul’s specific reference to the tithes and offering principle in 1 Cor.
9:13-14 (as related to material support for leaders, and as collected from others in Israel),
where he singled out tithing and abolished it. And I daresay you
CANT show it either!! Paul knew that all Israel was the vehicle for
preaching the gospel to the Gentiles (in word and lifestyle) ever
since that nation existed, and yet he focused (in a one to one
correspondence) only on the gospel LEADERS in the church as to
who should “live of *from+ the gospel”, since, correspondingly, only those who were LEADERS in
the ancient temple were “partakers of the altar” (or what was given as offerings by the people;
those who were not leaders, except the poor, did not partake from gifts off the altar as given to
leaders at the altar). To ignore that reality, and the reality that it’s the LEADERS in the gospel
ministry today who officiate in the sacraments of communion, baptism, weddings, etc., is to
prove that you cherry pick aspects of the Bible to suit your newly acquired perspective that
opposes tithing….since that’s the only way it can work for you, obviously!

Since “the Lord” is not just Jesus as a man, but Jesus as Jehovah God (“the Lord *Jehovah+ God
from heaven”; 1Cor. 15:47) then I cannot argue, as you shortsightedly do, that when Paul says
in 1 Cor. 9:13-14 “EVEN SO” (or in like manner, or in just the same way) “the Lord has ordained”
that they which “preach the gospel must live of the gospel”, that this was only related to Jesus’
words on earth (as a man) to his leading disciples in Luke 9 & 10 (i.e. the leading 12 and then
the 70 sent out from among his many hundreds of then followers). The “gospel” is “everlasting”
(Rev. 14:6) ever since man sinned, and was as much preached by ancient Israel as well as by
modern spiritual Israel. It was even preached by Abraham, and Jacob long before the Levitical
system, it was preached by Melchizedek as “the priest of the
most high God” (as a matter of fact it was preached by God’s
people in every age before and after Abraham). So that
“ordained” principle by Jehovah or the Lord himself (with
Jesus himself as Israel’s God or “the Lord”) it always had in
focus the LEADERS in the preaching of the gospel needing
material support…. just like Melchizedek did, just like the
Levites did later, just like the sent out apostles (or leading disciples) did, and just like LEADERS
today in the work of the ministry do as they operate under the SUPERIOR priesthood now in
place (i.e. after the order of Melchizedek that included tithing to materially support the
leaders; not to support all preachers of the gospel including even laymen). It's interesting that
just as under Moses Israel had 12 tribe leaders and 70 elders, Jesus patterned this leadership
system as well when he sent out leading gospel workers to evangelize Israel, and had them
supported by Israel itself (see Luke 9:1-11 and Luke 10:1-24)...just as ancient priests were
ordained to be supported by Israel as an ordained principle.

And remember, that long “ordained” principle included BOTH tithes and offerings!! When
Jesus sent out the LEADING twelve and then the seventy in Luke 9 & 10, his own Levitical system
set up by him as God (“the Lord”) was still legitimately in operation, i.e. the priests in the temple
receiving material support in the form of food that was tithed. His leading disciples sent out at
that time were supported in the form of free will offerings of food and lodging as they entered
and stayed at whatever house they chose. Both scenarios were in operation, and Jesus did not
abolish or override/overshadow the Levitical system by way of his disciples collecting tithes
while he was here (since they were not Levites), neither did he abolish either the tithing or
offering principle while on earth.

But obviously, it’s only years later after what occurred in Luke 10, that with his death on the
cross, and he being later installed as Priest in heaven (after the Melchizedek order) it would
naturally see one temple system transitioning to the other (i.e. with focus moved from the
priesthood in the literal earthly temple, to his priesthood leadership in the heavenly temple
above, and to the priesthood/pastoral leadership in the spiritual temple of the church), and it
would then see a CHANGE of the priesthood, and a reverting to the principle where tithing
included tithing “ALL” material increase (Gen 14:20; Gen. 28:22) to support the spiritual leaders
(not just the tithing of food or farm produce). And why would there need to be a wider scope of
what was tithed? Simple. The gospel would go to the globe thereafter (not just operate
among Israel as a literal nation) and as the world advances from agrarian economies to
industrial ones as we do have today, the material needs of leaders in the gospel ministry and
of the poor are much, much more than just food (but would now/today include bills of a wide
variety, e.g. water, electricity, telephone, gas, groceries, education, etc.).

Now I am convinced that God is practical and foresees everything, and would have taken into
consideration the fact that the needs of leaders would change as the centuries roll by. Hence the
Melchizedek type priesthood now in operation involving tithing “ALL”, (i.e. “all”, which would
include money, which is the dominant source of value and material increase these days) this
Melchizedek-type system is a changed system now wisely in place to accommodate the changed
needs of leaders in the gospel ministry. Deny it and oppose it all you want, brother X, but it is
biblical, whether you like it or not, or whether it appeals to you or not."

--END QUOTE--

All of the foregoing now sets the stage for me to address all the related questions and fallacies
often heard about tithes and offering in some churches and coming from some misguided
preachers and authors. It will get even more interesting. But before I delve into those other
controversial questions and answers, let me first make a special appeal:

MY APPEAL TO SOME SDA BRETHREN WHO LOST THEIR WAY

OVER THE TITHING ISSUE:

Dear brother/sister, ever remember that the Levitical system as

connected to THEM the Levites, and one specifically tithing
farm products for them, it was abolished, but NOT the principle of tithing itself that featured
in the Melchizedek-type priesthood that’s superior to and pre-dated the temporary Levitical
system; with Paul even arguing in Hebrews 7 that Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek in the
“loins” of Abraham as proof of the superiority of that type of priesthood prefiguring the
ultimate priesthood that was to come after the Levitical system ended. And so, with that
order of superior priesthood now in place even as you read these words of mine, it most
assuredly includes tithes (as exemplified by your spiritual father, Abraham; see Gen. 14:16-20
with Gal. 3:29); it does not and cannot exclude it….since a change of the priesthood to the
Melchizedek type (Heb. 7:12) does not mean an abolishment of all priesthood, and what's
due to priest-leaders.

Church history records over the centuries do show Christian bishops/leaders (3rd and 8th
century) accepting tithes in the form of money, just as church history records show churches
observing the biblical seventh-day Sabbath over the centuries. So it’s no new invention by
SDAs today to observe the Seventh-day Sabbath in New Testament times, or to collect tithes
of “all”, including tithes of money if that’s what’s available as the dominant form of material
increase. Try as you might, the SDA position has validity, and you CANNOT disprove it beyond
the shadow of a doubt. You cant!! Period!

While it is true that Christians are not under the Old Covenant, it is not true that the principle
of tithing was discontinued under the New Covenant; it’s just like the principle of giving
offerings to God was not discontinued; just maybe the format in which it’s done underwent a
change. Consider the invalidity of the argument that, as some argue, there is no direct
command to tithe in the New Testament. What need would there have been for Christ or the
apostles to command people to do what they were already in the habit of doing? The
opponents of tithing look for a direct command from God in the New Testament telling them
that they must tithe, but shouldn’t they be looking for just the opposite? Shouldn’t they be
looking to see if there is any command either to STOP tithing, or to stop giving offerings?
God’s commands are in force until He gives us instructions to do otherwise. For example, when
the apostles were led by God to understand that the Gentiles were not required to be
circumcised, they were careful to write letters explaining this decision. However, there is
absolutely not a single word in the New Testament telling us that we are NOT to tithe!

If you want to wake up on Judgment day, and discover you erred, and despite warnings that
you’re trampling on the tithing principle that’s after the priesthood of the order of
Melchizedek, would it be worth it, when you can simply “err on the side of caution” and, like
Abraham, give God “tithes of ALL” out of a heart of love….the bare minimum (or one tenth) to
support leaders in the gospel ministry?

Would it be worth it to today deny that “in the multitude of counsel there is safety” (Proverbs
11:14), and stubbornly refuse to unite with all your pioneering and present SDA brethren in
this matter, including refusing to heed Mrs. White’s “Spirit of prophecy” counsels given all of
her life on the validity of tithes today, and instead follow your own personal opinion that’s, at
best, faulty, shortsighted and inconclusive, and at worst is out-rightly denying and trampling
on the very principle seen in the system of priesthood after the order of Melchizedek; an
order that’s now in place?

In the end, your decisions remain yours, you have the right to your opinion (and it’s
personalized interpretation of scripture), and you do reserve the freedom to live as you see fit. I
will respect your decision to abandon tithing and to remove yourself from the SDA membership
if you so choose. I will love you just the same, but I pray you won’t have to find out the hard
way (on the Judgment Day) that you were wrong, despite repeated warnings!!

For readers who want to delve more deeply into the issues, see these two links below, where I
addressed, in the first instance a former SDA member on the tithing issue, and secondly, a
present SDA member who has rejected the SDA doctrine on the tithing issue:

Link 1:
https://www.scribd.com/document/230726950/Tithing-Remains-Binding-Refuting-Dr-Hill-s-
Anti-Tithing-Thesis

Link 2:
https://www.scribd.com/document/426433723/Re-Tithing-Note-to-Bro-Gilling

Now moving on….

QUESTION 3:
Is it biblical to apply general principles related to material support for church
leaders, and collect money as tithes and offerings, even if God did not
specifically command the tithing of money?

ANSWER:
Most certainly!! Only if one could never intelligently apply general bible principles to determine
specific things God did not directly command, could the answer to the above question be a no!
But obviously there are many things God did not mention nor command directly which still fall
under the ambit of the overarching principles in his Word. For instance, as part of baptismal
vow, my Church, the SDA Church, has our members vowing not to smoke tobacco, or use hard
drugs like cocaine and heroin, or gamble, etc. Nowhere in the Bible can one ever find a specific
command not to do these things. Yet, applying general bible principles which command us to
care for our bodies as the temple of God (since God does wish that we “be in health even as our
soul prospers”), or principles which expect of us to work for our living (“by the sweat of our
brow”, as it were), then we can be assured that our Church is correct in prohibiting smoking
tobacco, using hard drugs and engaging in gambling, despite there's not one specific command
in the Bible regarding same. It's quite similar to the Bible nowhere mentioning masturbation
specifically, and specifically outlawing the practice, yet applying general principles related to
sexual purity (i.e. guarding our “vessel unto honor”), not lusting (or not accommodating
sexually charged thoughts that lead to extreme sexual arousal if not married), and taking the
advice to marry instead of "burning", it can be seen that masturbation is certainly not God's will
for his children, and hence is outlawed!

With the above borne in mind, it can be seen that the overarching principle inherent in the
principle of returning tithes and offerings is simply to provide material support for the leaders
in the cause of God, and for welfare relief for the poor, and other functional needs related to
the cause of God's church. If there had been no precedent for the tithes, for instance, to be
seen as an "offering", neither was there no precedent for there to be tithes “of all" or much
more than just farm products or food, nor a precedent for the tithes to not only apply to the
Levites, then I could not be objectively and honestly defending the SDA Church's stance to have
members return tithes and offerings as money. But (as seen under answered questions 1 and 2
so far) we do see precedence in the Bible for all gifts to God
(including the tithe) to be deemed an "offering" (whether it be
cash or in kind), we do see precedence for tithing much more than
just food or farm products (i.e. it included even goods among war
spoils and it also included wages earned), and we do see that
tithes was not just applicable to the Levites or their system.

Thus with all of the above considered, I confidently defend the SDA Church's stance on tithes
and offerings being money. It certainly can be other things as well (goods, products, etc.), but
nothing can really be pointed to as prohibiting tithing money as material support for God's
cause, except just harping on farm products given to the Levites in their time. Nowhere in the
New Testament is tithing prohibited, and nowhere is it commanded, and nowhere is tithing in
the form of money prohibited, and nowhere is tithe in the form of money commanded.....but
the principle of materially supporting the leaders is "ordained" by God himself (1 Cor. 9:13-
14), and the principle remains binding, and neither the tithing principle nor the offerings
principle for that "ordained" purpose was ever mentioned specifically and abolished.

As it concerns returning money, after all money is just the means of exchange for food,
clothing, shelter, and all the material needs which can be supplied when bills can be paid. It's
only someone who's super literalistic who thinks God would condemn someone giving money,
or the Church demanding money as tithes and offerings, which is a medium that would simply
be the means of supplying the things needed by the leaders of the cause, the things needed by
the poor, or needed for the general support of his ministry! Those who think it's just
philosophical arguments am applying here, should then never as a Christian oppose
masturbation, smoking tobacco, using or trafficking in hard drugs like cocaine and heroin, etc.,
since they would have to be consistent and argue that the Bible never specifically mentioned or
prohibited these things. But that would certainly be a slippery slope for them to climb!
 QUESTION 4:
Did the New Testament specifically say that all "free will offerings" should only be money to
support the cause of God, and to what specifically was Paul referring to when he said "God
loveth a cheerful giver" in 2 Cor. 9?

ANSWER:
Nowhere did the New Testament say all free will offerings should be
money! Nowhere is that ever commanded or explicated to be only
money, or that it should only be money. In ancient Israel "offerings"
included farm products (animal and plant material), sacrifices (e.g. Lev.
22:23), money, precious gem and metals, etc...even wood or lumber was given as an "offering"
(e.g. see Nehemiah 10:34) The New Testament show examples of "free will offerings" or "gifts"
(given to support the apostles/bishops and to provide relief support for the poor) all being a
wide variety of things...e.g. food, lodging, money from the sale of property, clothes, etc. All of
the various means were welcome and accepted, but NOWHERE in scripture are "free will
offerings" given to support God's cause ever fixed at only being money. Nowhere!

However, for convenience, churches over time seem to have settled on the practicality of
money given as "offerings" to support leaders and the poor, since it is the universal medium
of exchange for food, housing, clothes, miscellaneous bill payments, etc. No one seem to
have any hang up on "offerings" being given only or mainly as money, despite nowhere does
the Bible limit "offerings" to money, but once tithes are opposed the popular argument
against it is that it must be farm products only, otherwise it's not a tithe, yet the Bible itself
shows it doesn't have to be food or farm products only as it was in the system under the
Levites, since it was not always so, as proven by the Abrahamic or pre-Levitical period. Also,
as seen in the post-Levitical system of priesthood--- the present priesthood after the order of
Melchizedek--- historical Church records show bishops in the 3rd and 8th century collecting
tithes as money. See again the answers to questions 1 and 2 for greater clarity on this issue.

In addition, Paul in 2 Cor. 9:7 was NOT giving general commands for offerings of money only,
and for money offerings to replace the tithing principle. That's all an assumption and a
reading into the scriptures by eisogesis what's not there! Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 8 and 9
to address what was promised by the Corinthian brethren as relief items for the ongoing
famine or "dearth" (remember originally his letter to the Corinthians or the Church in Corinth
had no chapters and verses as we have today, so it was just one running letter or epistle). It was
Paul reminding them how to give towards the famine (dearth) relief that he had reminded
them of, and he was picking up their liberal famine relief gifts shortly. Proof?

"Acts 11:27 And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.
Act 11:28 And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that
there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of
Claudius Caesar.
Act 11:29 Then the disciples, every man *according *to *his
*ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in
Judaea:
Act 11:30 Which also they did, and sent it to the elders by the
hands of Barnabas and Saul (or Paul)." ---King James Version (Bible)

So Paul's letter to the Corinthians was NOT written in a vacuum, or he was not just speaking
generally of offerings, but he was speaking in the context of he coming to later pick up those
relief items (in-gathering style), which obviously would not only be money, but would include
food, since that's what's mainly needed in a famine or shortage of food! People who disregard
context jump over all the verses in 2 Cor. 9:1-6 and ignore the same Paul writing in 1 Cor. 16:1-6
and Romans 15:25-26, and in direct relation to what was reported in Acts 11:27-30, and they
forget or ignore that whole narrative that ties together as one whole story. No wonder they mix
up themselves, because they don't allow the Bible to, by the line upon line principle, explain
itself. Such a pity careless readers of the Bible fall for this, and impose meanings that are
unwarranted!!

And those who claim that Paul’s letters and his utterances about a specific historical situation
can be interpreted as general principles about “cheerfully” giving “offerings” as money to God’s
cause, they should remember that the same approach can be taken when looking at ancient
Israel and their particular historical circumstance, and gleaning general principles about giving
tithes to God as money today!! “All scripture” is “profitable for doctrine” the Bible says!!
Remember?

QUESTION 5:
How does the principle of tithes and offerings show up the hypocrisy of some preachers and
leaders of some church denominations?

ANSWER:
Many "Christians", especially some leaders and pastors, display a certain level of hypocrisy as it
concerns their treatment of the Old Testament part of the Bible!! Why do I say so? Because
they usually seek to do away with it when it talks about the Sabbath, the Ten Commandments,
the laws of health and diet, the principles against the wearing of ornaments or jewelry, etc.,
BUT they go digging around in the Old Testament for laws to establish tithe paying so that their
INCOME or MONEY-MAKING programs can be supported with the same Old Testament
scriptures. Often many try to correctly find evidence in the Old Testament that tithe paying
was a moral principle that pre-dated the Jewish nation and the old covenant, or is a universal
principle that establishes God's OWNERSHIP of all material blessings, and hence his claim to
all we own. Yet when the same principles can be correctly shown about the Sabbath and Ten
Commandments predating Jews and the old covenant, or about the laws of diet and health
also predating them (as proven at the link below), these same Church leaders cry out that
"the Old Testament is done away with"!! Hypocrisy!!! What is plain is that many of them are
SELF-SERVING and money is their "god", but giving full allegiance to the God of Heaven who
owns ALL we have and are, including our TIME, our bodies and health, this takes second place
to misguided Church tradition and denominational opinions. It is time people see through the
hypocrisy of these Church leaders and realize that it was of the very Old Testament part of the
Bible that the following words were declared (since the New Testament was not yet fully
written or compiled when Paul said the following):

"2 Timothy 3:16-17 All [Old Testament] scripture is given by inspiration of

God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction
in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished
unto all good works." ---King James Version (Bible)

See the link below for how the hypocrisy of some is shown up (click the link).
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10217324945821953&set=pb.1422297221.-
2207520000.1569243837.&type=3&theater
 QUESTION 6:
What could be the real reason why some people who claim to love God and supporting his
cause, yet they oppose a structured tithe, but not an unstructured "free will offering" as a
means of contributing to God's cause?

ANSWER:
Could it be that it exposes the selfishness of our hearts? God asks for simply one tenth of all
we receive from his hands as material blessing, as pledged support for his cause, while we
keep the lion's share, or nine tenths. YET, so many people find it hard to return in a
committed and structured way that one tenth to supports God's cause. Could it be they find
every excuse possible so that they can keep it all to themselves, and only, on occasion, return
a "free will offering" that's not a regular form of commitment? Could it be that despite those
same persons commit themselves to monthly loan payments, monthly investment amounts,
monthly fixed saving amounts, monthly spending on a wide variety of personal effects and
bills, yet choose not to commit a structured monthly amount to God's cause? Hmmmm.

It's certainly not the Bible which can be pointed to as irrefutably proving the abolishment of
giving to God in a structured way (as the bible-based answers to questions 1 and 2 above have
proven), so what really is the deep-seated motive for all this refusal to give God (who gave all
for us) the bare minimum (one tenth) of all we possess in a regular and structured way to
support his cause? Could it be that SELF is the main reason? After all, didn't the Bible warn us
that:

"Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know
it?" ---King James Version (Bible)

Do we really know ourselves, and the depths of selfishness which may motivate our arguments
against tithing?

BOTTOMLINE?
Let me say it again. The opponents of tithing look for a direct command from God in the New
Testament telling them that they must tithe, but shouldn’t they be looking for just the
opposite? Shouldn’t they be looking to see if there is any command to STOP tithing?
God’s commands are in force until He gives us instructions to do otherwise. For example, when
the apostles were led by God to understand that the Gentiles were not required to be
circumcised in the flesh (only in heart, spiritually), they were careful to write letters explaining
this decision. However, there is absolutely not a single word in the New Testament telling us
that we are NOT to tithe! In addition, those who oppose tithing as a structured way of giving
to God’s cause, and make the excuse that “free will giving” is better since it can mean that
one can freely give even more than the tenth that the tithe required, often it is the case that
they (those making this argument) are NOT engaged in giving more than the tenth of their
income every month to God; it’s just a theoretically manufactured ‘argument’ engaged in so
as to avoid the structured tenth as a bare minimum one offers to God’s cause each month!
 QUESTION 7:
Why did the priests also return a tithe in Numbers 18:26-32, and why did God occasionally
allow the Jewish tithe to be converted to money and the proceeds eaten by the ancient non-
Levite (or non-priest) in Deuteronomy 14:22-29??

The real reasons may surprise many. Many miss the significance of the priests performing what
was a "shadow of things to come", by they themselves returning a priestly tithe, despite not
being farmers or not even owning land, or the normal Israelite at times “eating” the tithe.

First it shows that tithing was not just a means of supporting the priests, but was, MORE
IMPORTANTLY, an act of worship, explaining why the priests themselves did it. And because it
was and act showing allegiance to God, the priests themselves had to do it too, despite what
they gave as tithes would NOT be going to support anyone else...since they were only allowed
to eat the remaining portion of all they got from the people!!

Anything the priests did was a "shadow" of a greater reality to come, and if they tithed,
then with a change of the priesthood (not an abolishment of all priesthood), then we can
see why tithing remains a principle that Paul never abrogated when he brought it up in 1 Cor.
9:13, 14. If Paul had abrogated the principle entirely, then the "shadow" would have existed
but no reality to be met in the new era. That's impossible!!

Under the ancient system, the Levites (the priestly class) would return a tithe of all the tithes to
God, and it was this ultimate tithe that represented the entire NATION of Israel returning a
tithe to God (even when some, like the poor, could not tithe due to material lack). Thus God
could truly accuse the "whole NATION" of Israel of "robbing" God of "tithes and offerings" in
Malachi 3:8, especially if the Levites kept back the tithe of the tithe, or even if any part of Israel
(who could pay) failed to return the tithes and offerings. Leadership was representative of the
whole group (a principle seen all over the Bible), and also Israel was seen in God's eyes as "one"
(sometimes represented as if one person or one “son”; as seen in Deut. 32:9-18 with Hosea
11:1) and so what the Levites did on behalf of all Israel, they did as a "shadow of things to
come", and this indicates precisely a point am making here. Abraham, the patriarch of
Israel, paid tithes to Melchizedek who was representative of Christ's ultimate priesthood, and
Levi, the father of the tithe-paying class of priests, by *metaphorically paying tithes through
Abraham (as seen in Hebrews 7) it showed the obligation of all Israel to show 'material
allegiance' to the ultimate Priest and Leader or King after the order of Melchizedek.

Today, all Church members are so one with Christ (the Priest-King after the order of
Melchizedek), that every member is likewise called "kings and priests", and so the Church is
indeed legitimately vested with that representative authority to receive tithes and offerings for
God's cause. With the Church having all its members being spiritual "priests", then I can see
why, just like Abraham (who was nomadic) and like the Levites who had no land inheritance,
today Christians who are "priests", they are depicted as "pilgrims" with no earthly country
(i.e. with no ultimate land inheritance on earth as yet), and thus (through the Church's
leadership structure, just like Aaron heading up the Levitical priesthood) the Church can receive
and benefit from tithes and offerings in terms of the financing of the work of God (but as
managed by the leaders).

Even this reality of the Church's present "oneness" with the ultimate Priest-King, and the
Church receiving and consuming/utilizing the tithe of all material wealth, it was
foreshadowed in normal Israelites on occasions given the freedom to ritually partake of or
consume (“eat”) the tithe themselves in Deut. 14:22-26. To someone not having the eye-salve
of the Holy Spirit as guide, this may seem strange that the normal Israelite was asked to "eat
the tithe" (whether as products of the land or as was converted to money on occasions), but
every "shadow" under the Mosaic system had a corresponding reality under the ultimate
priesthood of Melchizedek. Today, unlike under the Mosaic code, ALL spiritual Israel (i.e. the
organized Church cooperatively) are of the priestly class, and so has the RIGHT to receive the
tithe for the Church’s utilization (through its bishopric or leadership), as well as it has the
OBLIGATION to return the tithe, as the priestly class did under the Mosaic code, and return
it to the highest religious authority, the High Priest (which in this case is Christ himself, the
PRIEST-KING operating after the order of Melchizedek).

By the ceremonial "shadow" of tithe payment by all priests/Levites, and by the ceremonial
"shadow" of the normal Israelite being asked to consume the tithe on a special occasion, as
seen in Deut. 14:22-26, we know that the principle or reality it points to REMAINS in the
new era; just as the principle of circumcision (of heart), atoning sacrifices, mediatory
priesthood, etc., they all REMAIN applicable, even if realized in a new way. That is why Cyprian
of Carthage (a third century church bishop of North Africa) could argue for the neglected
“tenth” or tithing principle (in the third century) as minimum support for ‘career’ ministers,
showing plainly in the third century that the principle of tithes was still understood as
applicable to the ONGOING monetary support of the ministers/clergy operating as if they were
ancient priests at the altar receiving products of the earth. THE PRINCIPLE WAS STILL IN FORCE,
AS PAUL MAKES PLAIN IN 1 COR. 9:13, 14. A Levitical shadow indicates a reality it prefigures,
and so no shadow in the Levitical system could exist that has no corresponding reality today,
and this includes tithing under that system. Hebrews 7 is a total rebuke to those opposed to
the binding principle of tithing for the Christian, the "priest" who is one with Christ, the
ultimate Priest-King prefigured by Melchizedek who was typifying the superior priesthood
that was to come after the Levitical system ended… a superior priesthood that certainly
involved the universal tithing principle.

--------------THE END--------------

Appendix 1:
QUESTION by Keisha Bernard Mohammed (on Facebook):

"Hi Mr. Gillespie. Hope all is well with you and the family. Why do Pastors, Apostles and
Prophets ask people to sow large seed (money). Please explain what is seed sowing .Thank
you."
ANSWER: “Not sure about the "apostle" or "prophet" status of these money solicitors/pastors of
SOME (i.e. non SDA) churches!! I happen to be part of a church (the SDA Church) that does *NOT
engage in these money-making schemes in order to fatten the individual pastor's/preacher's
pockets...i.e. asking people to give money in a profit-making venture, or "sowing seeds"
[meaning giving money to the individual pastor/preacher] to get a return harvest that's so-
called tenfold, hundredfold and the like. I see no bible-based principle for it in the New
Testament Church. And it smacks of money-making gimmickery... ALL PART OF THE SO-CALLED
"PROSPERITY GOSPEL" PUPPETRY IN SOME CHURCH GROUPS!! DON'T FALL FOR IT!!”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH1vQoDx8fs

Appendix 2:
FACEBOOK COMMENTS by Jayson Downer
“I believe in giving and not necessarily tithing. However if a Church has it as a part of their
belief system, and explains to members that it is for the governance of the Church, that’s fine
with me. My issue is with those who say if you do not tithe you are cursed.”

ANSWER:
That "curse" (see Malachi 3:8-9) was not only connected to tithing but also to not giving free
will offerings (and remember both principles Paul appealed to in 1 Cor. 9:13-14, and he never
singled out and abolished any). Anyone who refuses to recognize God's ownership of all and
does not return an offering to God is cursed, because of what God ordained (1 Cor. 9:13-14),
and remember offerings to God included tithes (a tithe is an offering). To cherry pick one and
ignore the other is also hypocritical, because none as a principle was singled out and abolished
in the New Testament. None!

And remember, Jayson Downer, the church is still a "royal priesthood" under the Melchizedek
order, and we are still a "holy nation" (1 Peter 2:9-10), and we are all "Abraham's seed" (Gal.
3;29), so we can't separate ourselves from things related to Abraham's spiritual fatherhood and
his example of serving God, AND OBEYING HIS COMMANDS out of love (Gen. 26:5; 1 John 5:3),
not compulsion (including he tithing), because no Christian can escape being part of Israel in the
spiritual sense.

Jayson Downer I would ask you who was Malachi 3 referring to (Priest/Pastor or congregants)
but its nit a debate….

Derrick Gillespie He makes plain in Mal. 3:8-9....he was speaking to Israel or "THIS WHOLE
NATION" (since the whole nation gave "offerings" to God, and the priests returned tithes on
behalf of the whole nation). Might I ask, are you part of "the holy nation" "the royal priesthood"
of spiritual Israel that Peter spoke of in 1 Peter 2:9-10? Are you a Christian who is supposed to
be Abraham's seed that Paul spoke of in Gal. 3:29, and are you of spiritual Israel, or are you not
of Israel in any way whatsoever as a Christian? Yes or no? No need to debate. A yes or no
answer will suffice!

Jayson Downer Aint debating... I am a Gentile saved by grace .

Derrick Gillespie No!! You are Abraham's seed if ye be Christ's saved by grace (Gal. 3:29), AND
YE MUST BECOME PART OF THE "HOLY NATION" AND "THE ROYAL PRIESTHOOD" IN THE
SPIRITUAL WAY (1 Peter 2:9-10). Why deny the plain word in the Scriptures? Need to
be reminded? Well here it is:

"Gal 3:29 And if ye be Christ's [as *Galatian *Gentiles], then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs
according to the promise."

"1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers [*Gentiles] scattered throughout
Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 1 Peter 2:9 ... ye are a chosen generation, a
royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him
who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light:
1Pe 2:10 Which in time past [as Gentiles] were not a people, but are now the people of God:
which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy."

I don't debate the plain scriptures, I present it and leave it to do its work, Jayson Downer. See
why in Titus 3:8-11. All people of God in every age (Jew or Gentile) MUST be saved by grace, but
that grace teaches a specific lesson about obedience:

"Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared TO ALL MEN,
Tit 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly,
righteously, and godly, in this present world;
Tit 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our
Saviour Jesus Christ;
Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto
himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works."

"Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath
before ordained that we should walk in them"

OBEDIENCE TO FOREORDAINED ACTS/"WORKS" OF OBEDIENCE (AS "ORDAINED" IN 1 COR. 9:13-

14, FOR INSTANCE) IS THE NATURAL OUTGROWTH OF BEING TRULY SAVED BY GRACE...A
REALITY THAT MUST BE SEEN IN THE LIVES OF ALL *TRULY SAVED!!

To ever deny the above is to become a "heretic" (or denier of truth) that Paul warned about in
Titus 3:8-11, Jayson Downer. Let me hope you won’t. Smile!

Paul made plain:

"Titus 3:8 This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they
which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and
profitable unto men."

Hmmm.

No need to DEBATE the obvious, Jayson Downer. Hope you don't mind the reminders!

Jayson Downer I must be a heretic..lol..

Derrick Gillespie LOL. You said so, not me. But seriously, fun and joke aside. The scriptures
quoted above are plain, and can’t be denied. You are a child of Abraham or his "seed", once you
belong to Jesus as either Jew or Gentile (Gal. 3:29), and we as Gentiles were grafted into Israel,
as Paul made plain in Romans 9 and 11. Inescapable.

Jayson Downer Agree. I’m just saying I believe in giving and not mandatory tithing as giving
often can surpass the one tenth...

Derrick Gillespie Your belief should not be based on preference or feeling, but must have
support in the Word. I am all for the Word being appealed to...not personal preference. I notice
no appeal to, or quoting of the Word on your part...just you stating what you believe or feel, but
with no proof of its validity via the Word. Pity. Anyway, you have said your piece. Thanks for
your contribution, Jayson Downer. Readers will determine for themselves whose submission is
Bible based or not. One love. Bye…

Derrick Gillespie is a trained teacher in the Social Sciences, History, and Geography, and remains a
member of the SDA Church in Jamaica and a lay evangelist for SDAs.
(Contact Info: [email protected] OR https://www.facebook.com/derrick.gillespie