This post started because my friend Jesse Phillips tweeted an intriguing thought, he said, "I'm sorry, tithing to support a building & paid staff simply is not Biblically mandated. Otherwise Paul, Peter & Jesus were way off."
I would have to say that Jesse is 100% correct. This speaks to a bigger issue of the separation of the law and what Jesus brought when He came to earth. In my studies of tithing, I wanted to prove that it was Biblical because so many churches have taught that you should give 10%, every week, without fail. The argument becomes obtuse when people start to ask whether you should give 10% before taxes or after taxes.
During a church service, the question came up about what happened if you couldn't tithe; the pastor explained that he would actually keep a record of the times he missed and try to pay it back in full. I couldn't believe this, much less find this reasoning in the Bible. That the God who is merciful but just would lay a burden of debt on us simply because we didn't have the money to give to the church that week? That seems to be a little ri...
I would say this teaching shows that God is a selfish God and he does not want anything or anyone above or before him. We cannot serve a God and try to serve money and everything else as well. Money is the root to all evil, people are killed over money, they still money and family, friends, partners are torn apart over it. We spend so much money on materialistic things that are completely worthless once it leaves the store r parking lot and after this is all said and done there is nothing of value that can be utilized later. Knowledge, heart are things that will be utilized in the afterlife.
"In the Old Testament, it was every seven years, debts will be forgiven regardless of circumstance," Sponaugle said, referencing the civil laws noted in the Book of Deuteronomy.
For instance, Leviticus 25:35 states, “’if your brother becomes poor and cannot maintain himself with you, you shall support him as though he were a stranger and a sojourner, and he shall live with you” (ESV). As a Christian, a person is called to help those who are struggling, and speaks of giving everything a person has to help those around him or her. According to the Jacob Riis film, citizens turned a blind eye to all those suffering, without a home or food. It also states in Proverbs 22:2, “…the rich and the poor meet together; the Lord is the maker of them all” (ESV). God created everyone on the Earth, and did not create one group to feel superior over another. The last passage that represents the other half is Proverbs 28:6, “ Better is poor man who walks in his integrity than a rich man who is crooked in his ways” (ESV). A man can be as poor as can be, but wealth does not make you better in the eyes of God.
First is the Church’s view towards the State and taxes which is best illustrated in the synoptic gospels. The gospel writers repeatedly refer to tax collectors and prostitutes being welcomed at the table of the Lord. Furthermore, Matthew, who was once a tax collector, became one of the twelve apostles. So, not only does Christ invite government officials to join Him at His table, but one of His chosen twelve was a tax collector. From this Grant concludes that the early Christians held absolutely no animosity towards state and taxation, for “Jesus was no enemy of the Roman state and its tax system [and] Christians are not rebels against Rome
The ideas of the gospel of wealth are a scary concept today. If you look at it with a revisionist viewpoint the idea that rich are rich because God said so leaves us open for so much discrimination. The thoughts of this time were not able to see this, and the business owners wanted to keep the power in their hands.
“And thus came in the use of Money, some lasting thing that Men might keep without spoiling, and that by mutual consent Men would take in exchange for the truly useful, but perishable Supports of Life.” (Chapter V: 47).
Henry Hazlitt states, “The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups” (Hazlitt, 1979, p. 17). Leviticus 19:35-37 compels, “You shall do no wrong in judgment, in measurement of weight, or capacity. You shall have just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin: I am the Lord your God, who brought you out from the land of Egypt. You shall thus observe all My statutes, and all My ordinances, and do them: I am the Lord.” According to Proverbs 22:7, people will always be slaves to the lender as demonstrated by the Federal Reserve System violating Biblical values in economic
Introduction This paper examines the concept of charity from the ethical perspective and its impact on an individual and society as a whole. The practice of charity means the voluntary giving of help to those in need as a humanitarian act. Charity is a vast concept; it can be understood as a form of practice or virtue. Thus, this paper will try to understand the religious, emotional, social and economical circumstances, which lead to charity, its importance and methods by which we can support it. Further, we will try to analyse whether charity fits the concept of Deontology or Consequencealism.
The authors examine scripture from various places in the bible to make their case that the bible is full of economic advice. Additionally, the authors state (2010), “for centuries, cultures have looked to the Bible as a rich resource that has helped people think about the way morality and economics come together.” (Hill & Rae, 2010, p. 23) The author’s most basic understanding is that morality and economics are intertwined, and in order to fully understand economics one must understand the bibles economic standards. The authors laid out seven biblical teachings on issues such as economics, wealth creation, poverty, injustice, and assets throughout the book.
A revealing comparison can be made in the matter of money between the Parson and the Friar as to the monetary motivations of the clergy. The Parson was a poor man. He took out of the tithes given to him by parishoners and his salary to give back to them, as “rather wolde he yeven […] / unto his povre parisshens about/ of his offering, and eek of his substaunce.” (487-489) The Friar on the other hand was wealthy, and would rather take from the poor to increase his income than to give, “for thogh a widwe hadde noght a sho/ […] yet wolde he have a ferthing, er he wente.” (253-255) The actions of the Parson make those of the Friar look even worse. The Parson cares little for his own wealth, but is a great deal concerned about the poverty of his parishoners. The Friar cares very little about poverty, but is terribly concerned about his own income. On the subject of personal wealth, these two men may be seen as complete opposites, one showing the horror and inappropriate actions of the other, and th...
While the Hebrews were expected to abide by the laws laid out in the Old Testament by Moses, the coming and crucifixion of Jesus negated many of these laws, as the Law of Grace took precedence over everything prior. In his Doctrine and Discipline of Divorce, Milton uses scripture from both the Old and New Testaments and argues that the Law of Moses was more lenient than that of Grace, and therefore makes more sense.
If you die, you die. If you are killed, you are killed. And those who remain will devour each other!" 10 Then I took my staff called Favor and snapped it in two, showing that I had revoked the covenant I had made with all the nations. 11 That was the end of my covenant with them. Those who bought and sold sheep were watching me, and they knew that the LORD was speaking to them through my actions. 12 And I said to them, "If you like, give me my wages, whatever I am worth; but only if you want to." So they counted out for my wages thirty pieces of silver. 13 And the LORD said to me, "Throw it to the potters" – this magnificent sum at which they valued me! So I took the thirty coins and threw them to the potters in the Temple of the LORD. 14 Then I broke my other staff, Union, to show that the bond of unity between Judah and Israel was broken. 15 Then the LORD said to me, "Go again and play the part of a worthless shepherd. 16 This will illustrate how I will give this nation a...
Christianity and Wealth 'Jesus said to the rich young man, "Go, sell all that you have and
The rule of Biblical interpretation that was not followed and should have been was when a contradiction like this appears, the emphasis should only be given to the multiple passages that are clear rather than to a passage that is isolated and obscure. The only basis for establishing a doctrine cannot be based off the historical occurrence of an event. As well as the writer’s original intent must be the only valid interpretation of a Scripture passage.
“He must not take many wive,s or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.” ( Duet. 17:17 KJV)