Before I begin with this post, I want to quote a book. Now, don't get all hung up on the book or the author. Just listen to the quote… it's good!
"I never liked jazz music because jazz music doesn't resolve. But I was outside the Bagdad Theater in Portland one night when I saw a man playing the saxophone. I stood there for 15 minutes, and he never opened his eyes.
After that I liked jazz music.
Sometimes you have to watch somebody love something before you can love it yourself. It is as if they are showing you the way."
- Donald Miller, Blue Like Jazz
Now to the focus of this post… as a kid that grew up in church, there was this thing about tithing that never resolved for me. A splinter in my mind if you will that still won't let me go.
As I have processed and processed this idea, I wrestle with how to explain God's expectations for money to people who live in the richest country in the world. Let's be real for just a minute. I don't want to lay heavy burdens on people unjustly. And at the same time I don't want to remove clear obligations either. And because people are so weird about money it puts a lot of pressure on me to state the things that I believe are true, but say them in a way that can move both extremes (and there are lots of people in both extreme camps) to what I believe is a healthy and theocentric view of how we are to handle time, talents, and treasure.
I know there is a pressure to land one place or another. And I know that wherever we land, if we are going to be true to our conviction, there is a cost. So, as I have been doing over the past few posts, rather than writing to convince, I am going to give what I think are some healthy guiding principles for this discussion.
1. Proof texting any point is never a good idea. And the debate over tithing is one of the most proof texted and least understood conversations in scripture. On one side are those who bring out a few texts about tithing (i.e. Malachi 3) and on the other side are those who want to say that tithing is Old Testament and we are not bound by that covenant anymore.
I want to state emphatically and for the record - both sides are dead wrong. It is wrong to proof text and manipulate people by doing that. It is also wrong to assume that: 1. there are 2 stories of God working among man; 2. That God undoes one covenant to start another; 3. that we can use the Old Testament when we like it and disregard it when we don't (which gets done all the time); and 4. that just because God states something that He wants His people to do in the Old Testament and doesn't repeat it in the New Testament (which I don't believe is true in the case of tithing, but that is not the point) doesn't mean that we have no obligation to it (i.e. don't murder).
2. God's people understand that the earth is the Lord's and everything in it. So, exactly "none" of my money, time or abilities are mine to use as I see fit.
God's people are never asking the question, "How much should I give?" they are asking the question, "How much should I keep?" And that is a very different place to come from.
3. This new generation loves to give to causes not organizations or institutions. This has lead to people trying to justify splitting their tithe out among several different causes that they deem admirable or needed.
For the record, I love giving to what are called "parachurch" organizations. These are organizations like WorldVision, Campus Crusade, Innervarsity, Navigators, etc. There is nothing wrong with these organizations and this is certainly not a post on the efficacy of the parachurch. My wife and I absolutely support some of these out of our "over and above" giving.
But there is not one example that you can find, Old or New Testament, where there was ever anyone who got to choose when and how to give their money. They always came and gave it at the temple in the Old Testament, and they laid it at the apostle's feet in the New in order to have it properly distributed to meet the needs of the body and the community.
Resolving this tension and where you land on it is not on the shoulders of those who believe in a full tithe going to the church. I am not going to be dogmatic about where your tithe goes, but I am going to say that if you want to "buck the model," the burden of proof is on you, not those who up hold traditional acquisition and distribution.
4. 10% is SO NOT the point. Many people want to camp out here and say we don't have to give 10% anymore. And you should therefore allow everyone to decide how much and where they are going to give. The truth is that, for most, this is an excuse to not have to be generous at all.
That will never be okay with God. Therefore, that should never be okay with His people. God is a generous God and so His Kingdom of Priests should be as well. We are putting Him on display after all.
For the record, no one owes me an explanation of where and how they spend their money. And I am not calling for a reckoning of those who feel differently. What I would suggest is something far deeper.
For those of us who have matured in our faith, who have wrestled with the limitless goodness and blessing of our God, we should all be looking at 10% in the rear view mirror. That should be the starting point upon which we build a much more generous lifestyle.
10% isn't a goal, it is a starting line.
5. The New Testament does in fact give us a standard for giving. And for what it is worth, for anyone who actually says that they don't like 10% because that is Old Testament and they want to give as a "New Testament" Christian (which is a terrible term from start to finish), I am happy for them to do so. But actually do it. Read the examples of what they did in their giving and do that.
If you decide to do that, and you actually do it, 10% won't be a problem at all. you will be way above that.
And before you throw "don't give grudgingly or under compulsion for God loves a cheerful giver" in my face. That is NOT God saying that if you don't want to, it is okay for you to not give. You are still commanded to give regardless. But to do so grudgingly says more about how you feel about your God than about the money you are giving.
6. Our giving is not about us - at all!! In fact, the more we give, the more we can see that to be true.
First of all, giving reminds me that it is all His.
Second, no matter what western culture says to me, I am obligated to the community that I am a part of before I take care of myself. That is foundational to the Jesus way of engaging the world.
I will close with this rewriting of the opening thought.
I used to hate giving because I didn't see any benefit to it. Then one day I was part of a group with a tremendously generous person. And I watched as he told me the story of the blessing that it was to fulfill a need in someone else by laying down his pursuit of his own lifestyle and comfort. He had tears of joy in his eyes the whole time.
Then I saw what giving can do. So, I started giving more. And now, the more I give, the more I love giving.
Sometimes, you have to watch somebody who loves giving before you can love it yourself. It is as if they are showing you the way to bring heaven crashing into earth.
This is exactly what I preach. I couldn't agree more!
ReplyDeletevery well said..
ReplyDeleteWow!!!
ReplyDeleteI was just discussing this exact conversation with another church goer a couple months back. I posed to her this question. I grew up in a home where mom was Christian and Dad was not. Mom would continually bring her 10% tithe to church with a check and there would be serious Marital distress over the situation. Dad not being a believer had no desire to tithe and no desire to have his wife tithe away his money. There marriage ended up dissolving and they never tried to get back together. I find myself in a similar situation now. I am married to a non believer. He has not problem with me taking our kids to church and he has even joined me in church on more then one occasion but he looks at tithing the way my Dad looked at tithing. I must admit that part of me has had the same thoughts as my Dad. I have wrestled with the tithing question for a long long time. Since I still wrestle with tithing and my husband is not on board. We do not currently tithe. As I visit church after church and tried to find the right church for our family, it has always been in the back of my mind. Are you as a pastor accepting of the family who regularly attends your church but does not tithe? I have never attended the classes that real life offers due to this overwhelming question that has always made me question being a church going family. What is your thoughts on a situation like this?
ReplyDeleteAs a pastor, I am accepting of anyone who walks through our doors. Whether they are a drug addict, homosexual, alcoholic, abuser or abused, married, single, protected life or crazy past. It makes no difference to me and I don't even know or check who gives and who doesn't.
ReplyDeleteGiving to the church is not about making sure the church is "getting enough." Giving is about each of us becoming more generous in how we represent our God.
That being said, you are welcome at our church - period. But you will rob yourself of huge blessings I walking with God if you choose to not be generous. And I don't love you if I don't tell you the truth.
Thanks for your input Aaron! I appreciate it!
DeleteThanks for this post. It made me think a lot as all of your blog posts do. I really respect the time you spend writing your blog posts and how well you write them.
ReplyDeleteThese statement really contributed to what I’ve been mulling over for a long time:
“God's people are never asking the question, “How much should I give?” they are asking the question, "How much should I keep?" And that is a very different place to come from.”
“God's people understand that the earth is the Lord's and everything in it. So, exactly "none" of my money, time or abilities are mine to use as I see fit.”
I am totally in favor of the idea severely cramping our lifestyles to help those in need, and to help those who help those in need, and to “bring the Kingdom crashing into earth” as you say. And for most Americans, that should work out to WAY more than 10% as I think you suggest. Unfortunately, most of us (including me) that hold to this in theory don’t live it out in our lives to the degree that we hold to it in our heads.
Being raised in poverty, I can’t help but think about someone like a single mom of 3 that brings in $25,000/year, volunteers at her church when she can, helps the kids down the street in even greater need than her own kids – and yet gives 5% to a church while feeling guilty about not giving 10%. And I can’t help but think that she has sacrificed more than someone who, having a much greater income, sees 10% in the rearview mirror.
I think a person can buy into 1 story, no undone covenants, not throwing out OT passages, and accept OT obligations(interpretations vary) and still question the tithing status quo(10% mandate across the board), but I could be wrong.
This brings me to a question: Can extreme generosity be settled on and still allow for discussion of tithing in the old testament and so on?
i think that is the crux of the conversation. we settle on extreme generosity and then begin the discussion on what that looks like. How much? what percentage? etc.
ReplyDeleteAnd I do see your point with the single mom. I would give 2 additional thoughts… first, the thing about percentages is that they are equal regardless of income. little income, little giving.
second, Jesus watches the widow who gives the 2 mites in scripture. and she quietly gives and walks away. And Jesus says to her disciples that she did a good thing. He doesn't bail her out or give her money. He doesn't even talk to her. She walks away assuming no one saw it or heard. I don't think there are allowances for poverty. we are called to be generous - period.
I struggle with the widow’s mite verses.
ReplyDeleteJust before Jesus observes the widow give her 2 mites, he was warning of how the Pharisees want the fancy clothes, the best seats in the house, and lots of recognition for how they awesome they are. Along with this, Jesus makes the remark about how the Pharisees “devour widow’s houses”. Then, an actual widow shows up and tosses in her 2 mites. Upon observing the widow, Jesus makes some comments. This is where I struggle. Is Jesus overall point, “The Pharisees devour widow’s houses and here’s a good example. This widow has minimal means to get her basic needs and she gave all she had.” ? Or was his point, “Here is a widow doing what she is obligated to do, and she did it better than those other guys.”? Another question is: Was the widow obligated to give to the temple or was the temple obligated to take care of the widow….and the orphan and so on? I’m not saying I have the right answers to these questions, but these are some of the questions that I have.
As far as what who was obligated to whom… I would say yes and yes. Yes she is obligated to give and yes the temple is obligated to take care of her.
DeleteAnd yes, you are correct in Jesus' broader point about why He points her out. But don't lose sight of the moment either. She does give and Jesus doesn't say she shouldn't have to give. He says she did a good thing. Because her giving reveals a trust in God's provision that the rich folks didn't possess.
And, after all, isn't that exactly what giving reveals? How willing are we to trust in God's provision? Or do we need to keep for ourselves. That is at the crux of generosity.
By the way, I am preaching on this passage this Sunday, so you are helping me process. thanks for that!!
DeleteThanks for the hard work you do preparing for the sermons…and for the exceptional content and delivery!
ReplyDeleteI was thinking today about the widow’s mite passage in the following broad context.
It seems, from my limited understanding of the OT, that only land owners and herdsmen(owners of the herds) tithed in the OT.
IF that is true, OT aqusition/distribution looks very similar to NT church acquisition/distribution:
OT:
Acquisition: From landowners/herdsmen
Distribution: To Levitical priesthood, to poor
NT:
Acquisition: From possessors of land or houses who sold these things and laid the funds at the apostles’ feet.
Distribution: To everyone as they had need(Maybe since we are all now priests there is no specific amount for priests?).
In the more narrow context:
Is Jesus just saying the widow gave proportionally more or is he saying that what she did is good and obligatory?
Is the point that she did what is obligatory for her, or is the point that Jesus was lamenting that the whole system is not working (as in now widows houses are being devoured by some Pharisee/tradition-imposed obligations) as it was intended as established in OT? If Jesus is making both points, then doesn’t it need to fit the broader context where it doesn’t seem(to me as far as I can understand) like poor widows were required to tithe?
Granted, 1)Considering that we live in America and 2) Considering the socioeconomic disparity among those involved in churches compared to the general population(interesting to think about what factors might lead to this disparity), hardly any - if any - church regular attenders fall into the legitimately poor category in the USA.
ReplyDelete