Should struggling families tithe?

[disneysteve]

IMO - a father who would rather not tithe than admit his family is living beyond their means is sorely mistaken as well.

If you know how to budget based on $5000 a month, you should be able to budget based on $4500. And if your house is too expensive, you should move.

Or maybe they'd rather spend $700 a month on food, and not tithe because it's too hard to make ends meet.

Or maybe they used to make $80,000 a year, and now find their income reduced to $60,000, but are unwilling to change their lifestyle, so they cut back on tithe to make their lifestyle numbers work.

I generally agree but probably not to the full extent that you believe. I don't think, as a general rule, that people should cut out charitable giving in order to pay for a bunch of luxuries and high end lifestyle. That said, I also don't think people should have to live like paupers in order to keep sending 10% to the church. There has to be a happy medium. The question is where do you draw the line?

[GaryArnold]

Some people just don't get it.

The tithe was NEVER on anyone's income. It came from the miracles of God - crops and animals which are assets. The farmers did have INCOME from the sale of the crops, but that income was NOT tithed on.

Wage earners did NOT tithe. The farm workers did NOT tithe (except for the land owners). Carpenters did NOT tithe. Fishermen did NOT tithe. Tent makers did NOT tithe.

Many say that in Biblical times they didn’t have money and that the economy was based on bartering of goods and services. That is not so. The Bible shows they not only had money, but that money was used as a common way of doing business.

According to the International Bible Encyclopedia, the days of mere bartering ended before the days of Abraham.

Here are just a few examples from The Word to show they did, in fact, use money in Biblical times.

The tithing law itself proves they had both money and a marketing system for buying and selling their crops and animals (Deuteronomy 14:24-26).

THE PURCHASE OF LAND BY ABRAHAM - Genesis 23:15-16

THE PURCHASE OF LAND BY JACOB - Genesis 33:19

JOSEPH WAS SOLD TO THE ISHMEELITES - Genesis 37:28

A MONEY OFFERING TO BE USED FOR THE SERVICE OF THE TABERNACLE - Exodus 30:14-16,

USING SHEKEL OF SILVER TO VALUE A RAM - Leviticus 5:15

THE FOLLOWING VERSES REFER TO WAGES: Genesis 29:15, Genesis 30:28, Genesis 31:7-8, Genesis 31:41, Exodus 2:9, Leviticus 19:13, Malachi 3:5, etc.

THEY HAD A MONEY STANDARD

There are several places in Scripture indicating that scales were used to weigh metals and other items. The Law of Moses, for example, commands Jews not to use dishonest standards, but instead, to use honest scales and honest weights. (See also Deut. 25:13-15; Job 6:2-3; 31:6; Psa. 62:9; Prov. 11:1; 16:11; 20:10, 23; Isa. 40:12; 46:6; and Jer. 32:10).

Leviticus 19:35-36 – Do not use dishonest standards when measuring length, weight or quantity. Use honest scales and honest weights, an honest ephah and an honest hin. I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt.

In order for money to be an exchangeable equivalent for other commodities in today’s society, there must be a standard in place. Likewise, the Old Testament also had a set standard both prior to the law and during the law. A reference to a pre-law standard is here in Genesis 23:16.

Merchants in biblical times traveled from place to place conducting business. According to the written law, the standard weight for metals was set according to the sanctuary shekel (See also Ex 30:13, 24; 38:24-26; Lev. 5:15; Num. 7:13-86; 18:16).

Leviticus 27:25 – Every value is to be set according to the sanctuary shekel, …

In addition, 2 Samuel 14:26 shows that the weight standard for the shekel was set by the royal standard. No matter which era in history is studied, there existed a standard for the weight of precious metals.

Money was also used throughout the law. For example, God’s people gave money to support the tabernacle (Ex. 30:14-16; 38:24-31). There are many other examples that illustrate money’s place within the written law and indicate that money was indeed a part of everyday life. Exodus 35 provides such an example.

Exodus 35:5, 21-22 – From what you have, take an offering for the LORD. Everyone who is willing is to bring to the LORD an offering of gold, silver and bronze;

And there are many more examples to show that money was used for everyday transactions well before the Levitical tithe.

The ONLY people in the Old Testament that were commanded to tithe were those who INHERITED THE PROMISED LAND WITH EVERYTHING ON IT. They got the land, house, animals, crops, etc. ALL FREE AND CLEAR. No mortgage payment or rent to pay. And THEY were commanded to tithe on the crops and animals and take it to the Levites who INHERITED the tithe INSTEAD OF the promised land with everything on it.

HOW CAN YOU COMPARE THAT WITH CHRISTIANS WHO HAVE TO PAY THEIR MORTGAGE PAYMENT OR RENT, INCOME TAXES, PROPERTY TAXES, SALES TAXES, ETC?

There is no way to justify making some “principle” out of the Biblical facts and then apply it to Christians today. It is just flat out wrong and makes no sense at all.

[jpg7n16]

That said, I also don't think people should have to live like paupers in order to keep sending 10% to the church. There has to be a happy medium. The question is where do you draw the line?

See I just really don't like this sentiment. As though, paying a tithe means you'll be poor forever. But "giving sacrificially" means you're doing well with your money. Which if 10% makes you poor, how does 25% mean you're doing well?

If you make $60,000 a year, you can afford $1400/month for housing. If you tithe, that reduces your income to $54,000; and thus you can afford $1260/month for housing. Now how big of a difference is there between $1400 and $1260?

It means you can afford a $235k house, instead of a $260k home. Not that big of a difference.

If they lost that $60k job, and took a $50k one in the meantime, they still couldn't afford the house - even if they stopped tithing! But they'd try and stretch the income to make it work, so they didn't have to give up that lifestyle. And usually, they'd blame the tithe, or taxes, or something else as the reason why things were so tight. When their budget is the real issue.

Or would you say that they should "give sacrificially" at say 5%. What sacrifice?? They didn't give up anything. They kept their expensive home. Expensive car. Kept eating out. The only thing they sacrificed on, was their giving.

For someone who is low income already, things are tight as is. The tithe doesn't make them a "pauper." Instead of making 24,000, they're making 21,600. Things were going to be tight anyways. But there is minimal difference in the lifestyle you'll be able to live.



Can you give me an example, where the income itself is good enough to live well, but tithing turns them into "paupers?"

[elessar78]

I wonder how the world would change if we gave 2.4 hours a day to God.

144 minutes? The square root of which is 12. 12 disciples. It's a sign in numbers. Sorry to go rainman.

[jpg7n16]

144 minutes? The square root of which is 12. 12 disciples. It's a sign in numbers. Sorry to go rainman.

lol hahaha nice

[bjl584]

I would caution against a blanket assumption that a 10% difference to someone's income is insignificant. It could mean the difference between keeping the house and living on the street. In theory, someone could be living below their means, living in a reasonable house, driving an older car, etc, etc. Everything is fine. The tithe check gets written every month, and all the bills are paid. Then they lose their job and pick up a minimum wage job just to get by during tough times. Then they have a car accident and lose the car and end up with $100,000 in medical bills since they no longer have insurance. Now all of a sudden that extra 10% in the paycheck could come in very handy.

My point is, I think that one should provide for their family first. They brought them into existance. So, take care of them. When times are tough, and bad things happen, then the 10% that was the tithe needs to be stopped until things are made right in your household, there is food on the table, and the heater is blowing warm air. I don't see any reason why suspending your tithe for a time period is a bad thing. If I ever met someone that told me that they could have kept the house but they decided to tithe instead, and now he and the wife and kids are eating out of that dumpster over there; I would tell him that his priorities are out of whack.

[jpg7n16]

I would caution against a blanket assumption that a 10% difference to someone's income is insignificant. It could mean the difference between keeping the house and living on the street. In theory, someone could be living below their means, living in a reasonable house, driving an older car, etc, etc. Everything is fine. The tithe check gets written every month, and all the bills are paid. Then they lose their job and pick up a minimum wage job just to get by during tough times. Then they have a car accident and lose the car and end up with $100,000 in medical bills since they no longer have insurance. Now all of a sudden that extra 10% in the paycheck could come in very handy.

No. It would mean the difference between keeping the house, and living in a slightly smaller house.

In that case, they would have no job - and therefore no income. So no tithe. Or be on minimum wage. Minimum wage wouldn't do anything towards $100k of medical bills either. So my argument is that, even if they don't tithe - they're still screwed. What difference is there from $7 an hour to $6.30 an hour when you have $100k in medical bills?? The tithe isn't the problem - the low income is.

If you keep the extra 70 cents an hour, will you be able to avoid bankruptcy? No. There is virtually no difference.

My point is, I think that one should provide for their family first. They brought them into existance. So, take care of them. When times are tough, and bad things happen, then the 10% that was the tithe needs to be stopped until things are made right in your household, there is food on the table, and the heater is blowing warm air. I don't see any reason why suspending your tithe for a time period is a bad thing. If I ever met someone that told me that they could have kept the house but they decided to tithe instead, and now he and the wife and kids are eating out of that dumpster over there; I would tell him that his priorities are out of whack.

Technically, God brought you into existance. Many families have tried to have children and been unable.

When times are hard, and income is low - you should still honor God 1st.


And please see my post above in response to DS. Please give me a scenario where paying a tithe caused someone with a nice income and nice living to eat from dumpsters.

I hate the idea that 10% is the difference from rags to riches. These examples are always nice home --> homeless and eating from a dumpster.

Never does anyone give a realistic example of "nice $250k home" --> "almost as nice $175k home" Even though this is reality. The difference from 100% of income to 90% of income is not as big as you make it out to be.

[bjl584]

Okay. Going back to my example: Let's say our hypothetical family decides to try and sell their house and buy a smaller one, or even rent. What if it takes them 2 years to sell the house? They most likely won't be able to liquidate it at the snap of a finger. It will take time. And, during that time, I think that it is acceptable to suspend the tithe.

Why does one have to honor God with nothing but a portion of their income? I would argue that God knows when his children are suffering. If times are tough for a family, and they simply are unable to give money at this time, then can they not honor God by giving something else? Maybe give a Saturday of their time working a local soup kitchen? I don't think that God would frowm upon this as an alternative to giving and honoring Him.

[jpg7n16]

Okay. Going back to my example: Let's say our hypothetical family decides to try and sell their house and buy a smaller one, or even rent. What if it takes them 2 years to sell the house? They most likely won't be able to liquidate it at the snap of a finger. It will take time. And, during that time, I think that it is acceptable to suspend the tithe.

Then they were asking for a price that was unreasonable given the current market. A struggling family doesn't have to take just any offer that comes along, but isn't in the position to hold out for the ideal offer either.

Why does one have to honor God with nothing but a portion of their income? I would argue that God knows when his children are suffering. If times are tough for a family, and they simply are unable to give money at this time, then can they not honor God by giving something else? Maybe give a Saturday of their time working a local soup kitchen? I don't think that God would frowm upon this as an alternative to giving and honoring Him.

I never said, "only honor Him with your money." Or "if you give 10%, you are an awesome person and God will love you more." Because neither of those are true.

It doesn't have to be either/or. Give your money AND your time, if you can. Invest in other's lifes. Love your neighbor as yourself.

But if this family is struggling, why not use Saturday to pick up some extra work?

For every argument you want to make that 10% is too much of a strain, I can make the same that time would be better spent on helping the family.

ie. - come on, here's a guy barely able to feed his family, and instead of working, he spends his weekends volunteering for free?? shouldn't he be helping his own family before trying to help others? if he doesn't stop volunteering, he'll be serving his own family at the soup kitchen next week!


It's not about the money. And money isn't the only way to honor God. Nonetheless, you should honor Him with your money (Prov 3:9)

... among other ways to honor Him.

[GaryArnold]

When times are hard, and income is low - you should still honor God 1st.

If you think that honoring God first means to give the first tenth of your income to the church, show that to me in scripture. The tithe was NEVER the first. Every tenth animal, the LAST one out of every ten, NOT the first.

You want to mix FIRST with the tithe. That is a common error. Firstfruits had NOTHING to do with the tithe. The firstfruits was not a tenth. In fact, the firstfruits offerings were ONLY the first fruit from the crops, NOT the first part of anyone's income.

You confuse the tithe with income, and you confuse firstfruits with the tithe.

You totally ignore WHO paid the tithe, WHO received the tithe, and WHAT the tithe consisted of.

The tithe was commanded to be taken to THE LEVITES. The Levites were the SERVANTS TO THE PRIESTS. They were the musicians, singers, ushers, etc. Is that who you take your so-called tithe to? THEN the musicians, singers, ushers, etc. gave a tenth of the tithe to the priests. The priests did NOT tithe to anyone.

Both the Levites and the priests worked at The Temple ONLY about two weeks per year on a rotational basis.

There is absolutely no similarity between the Biblical tithe and what is being called a tithe today other than the tenth itself.

[GaryArnold]

Some here have a very odd way of "honoring God."

You "honor" God by:
1 - changing His definition of His tithe from His miracles to your income.
2 - changing His command to take His tithe to the Levites to take the tithe to wherever you want.
3 - ignoring that Jesus paid the whole price on the cross.

If you understand Numbers 18:27 in its proper context, you will know that tithing could NOT be on income. Otherwise, Numbers 18:27 is merely taking up space with no meaning.

Not all denominations teach and collect the tithe, and they bring in the funds needed without having to lie about tithing.

Tithing opponents throughout the years as compiled by Dr. David Croteau, Liberty University, You Mean I Don’t Have to Tithe?, p271-292.

Clement of Rome 100
Didache 100
Justin Martyr 165
Tertullian 230
Origen 255
Cyprian 258
Waldenses 1150+-
Thomas Aquinas 1275
John Wycliff 1384
John Huss 1415
German Peasants 1520
Anabaptists 1525
Erasmus 1536
Otto Brumfels 1534
Martin Luther 1546
Philip Melanchthon 1560
Separatists Amsterdam 1603
John Smythe 1609 Baptist
John Robinson 1610
English Parliament 1650+-
Puritans & Plgrims Mass 1650+-
John Cotton 1652 Puritan
Roger Williams 1636 Baptist
Little Parliament 1653
Oliver Cromwell 1658
John Milton 1658 Puritan
Particular Baptists 1660
John Owen 1680 Baptist
Francis Turretin 1687
John Bunyan 1688 Baptist
Quakers 1768
John Gill 1771 Baptist
John Wesley 1791
BAPTISTS IN AMERICA 1800s
Adam Clarke 1832 Baptist
Charles Buck 1833
J C Philpot 1835 Baptist
Charles H Spurgeon 1832 Baptist
Parsons Cooke 1850
Samuel Harris 1850
Edward A Lawrence 1850
John Peter Lange 1876
Henry William Clark 1891 Engllish
S H Kellogg 1891
G Campbell Morgan 1898 Congregational
Albert Vail 1913 Baptist
Frank Fox 1913
David MaConaughy 1918 Episcopal
William Pettingill 1932
John Harvey Grime 1934 Baptist
John T Mueller 1934 Lutheran
H E Dana 1937 Bapt Historian
R C H LENSKI 1946 Lutheran
Lewis Sperry Chafer 1948 DTS Foundeer
W E Vine 1949
James F Rand 1953
Francis Pieper 1953 Lutheran
Ray Stedman 1951
L L McR 1955 Catholic
Paul Leonard Stagg 1958 Baptist
Hiley H Ward 1958 Baptist
Roy T Cowles 1958
Elizabeth P Tilton 1958
R C Rein 1958 Lutheran
Robert A Baker 1959 Bapt Historian
Wick Bromall 1960
John Byron Evans 1960
Norman Tenpas 1967
James Edward Anderson 1967
Alfred Martin 1968
CHARLES C RYRIE 1969 DTS
Jerry Horner 1972 S Baptist
Pieter Verhoef 1974
Dennis Wretlind 1975
Jack J Peterson 1978 Pres
Donald Kraybill 1978
Jon Zens 1979 Baptist
Richard Cunningham 1979 S Bapt
Gary Frieson 1980
JOHN MACARTHUR 1982-2000
Paul Fink 1982
George Monroe Castillo 1982
Tony Badillo 1984
James M Boice 1986
Michael E Oliver 1986 Rest
W Clyde Tilley 1987
Scott Collier 1987
Ronald M Campbell 1987
R E O White 1988
William McDonald 1989
Charles Swindoll 1990 Dallas Seminary
Rhodes Thompson 1990
J VERNON MCGEE 1999
Jerome Smith 1992
CRAIG BLOMBERG 1993 Denver Seminary
J Duncan M Derrett 1993
Walter Kaiser Jr 1994 Gordon-Cromwell
Moises Silva 1994
Benny D Prince 1995
Brian K Morley 1996
Linda L Belleville 1996
Ron Rhodes 1997
Ernest L Martin 1997
Michael Webb 1998
R Johnston 1999
Mark Snoeberger 2000 Baptist
Stuart Murray 2000 Eng
George W Greene 2000
Old Line Primitive Baptists 2000
Jaime Cardinal Sin 2000 Cath Archbishop
RUSSELL EARL KELLY 2001 Baptist
Jonathan Kitchcart 2001
Frank Viola 2002
George Barna 2002
Michael Morrison 2002
Elliott Miller 2003
Matthew Narramore 2004
David Alan Black 2004 Baptist SEBTS
Andreas Kostenberger 2007 Baptist SEBTS
Danny Akin 2007 Baptist SEBTS
Mark Driscoll 2008
Roman Catholic Church
Jehovah’s Witnesses
New Worldwide Church of God

[bjl584]

Then they were asking for a price that was unreasonable given the current market. A struggling family doesn't have to take just any offer that comes along, but isn't in the position to hold out for the ideal offer either.



I never said, "only honor Him with your money." Or "if you give 10%, you are an awesome person and God will love you more." Because neither of those are true.

It doesn't have to be either/or. Give your money AND your time, if you can. Invest in other's lifes. Love your neighbor as yourself.

But if this family is struggling, why not use Saturday to pick up some extra work?

For every argument you want to make that 10% is too much of a strain, I can make the same that time would be better spent on helping the family.

ie. - come on, here's a guy barely able to feed his family, and instead of working, he spends his weekends volunteering for free?? shouldn't he be helping his own family before trying to help others? if he doesn't stop volunteering, he'll be serving his own family at the soup kitchen next week!


It's not about the money. And money isn't the only way to honor God. Nonetheless, you should honor Him with your money (Prov 3:9)

... among other ways to honor Him.

Of course, I could argue that if there is a struggling family, then why are they giving away 10% of their paycheck instead of taking care of their own bills? If he doesn't stop doing that he is going to be eating at the soup kitchen next week!

And about the house: Our family could sell it for a dollar and unload it overnight, but that would be unreasonable. They need to sell it for enough to buy something else or even to pay the rent somewhere else. In a depressed market that may take a while.

[bjl584]

I just think that making an assumption that 10% is "no big deal" is akin to the govt. deciding what's best for me. There is no common sense in assuming. One size really doesn't fit all. And, everyone's situation is different.

Give what you can, how you can. Help your fellow man, honor God, and take care of your needs. However that is to be achieved depends on who is trying to achieve it.

[jpg7n16]

If you think that honoring God first means to give the first tenth of your income to the church, show that to me in scripture. The tithe was NEVER the first. Every tenth animal, the LAST one out of every ten, NOT the first.

Which is why the Bible says to honor Him with your last-fruits, right?

Proverbs 3:9

[GaryArnold]

Which is why the Bible says to honor Him with your last-fruits, right?
Proverbs 3:9

Firstfruits = first of the crop (MIRACLES OF GOD) not first of man's income.

2 Timothy 2:6 (KJV) “The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits.”

1 Timothy 5:8 (KJV) “But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.”