Culturally Irrelevant

Is 10% giving mandatory, or even expected, in New Testament teaching? Is it assumed because of the largely Jewish audience? Probably. Is it a good place to start, as so many pastors today teach? It could be, but then why didn’t Jesus or Paul use it as a starting place when they taught? Should I follow what’s being taught in most churches today and teach people that they need to give at least 10% of their income? If so, what do I tell them will happen if they don’t follow this principle? Is God’s blessing on the 10% rule?

As a basline here, I want to assume the spirit of the law of tithing, i.e., the recognition that everything belongs to God, our love and worship most importantly, and that he wants us to show our understanding of this by gladly giving him the firstfruits of all types of resources: time, skill, money, property, etc. To ignore this principle is to deny God as our Source and, in effect, rob him of our worship.

That said, I’m wading through some thoughts about the 10% rule specifically because the reference to it is so commonly accepted and taught today, yet strangely absent from the New Testament, including Paul’s epistles to the Gentiles, who weren’t accustomed to tithing by law.

My bias, up front, is honestly mixed. I grew up as an Assemblies of God kid, so I walked into church every Sunday morning with my Buddy Barrel full of change. I’m really thankful that I was taught early on to give generously. However, I also saw people in our church being publicly recognized according to the amounts they gave, something for which I’m not thankful.

I tithed meticulously through high school, college and into my early to mid-twenties. But there were also times in life as a grad student and newlywed living 1300 miles away from normal when we were selling our things to pay bills and put food on the table. During those times, tithing occasionally came down to paying a bill or putting the right amount of money in the bucket. There were months we didn’t calculate how much we were giving; we gave what we could and sometimes we gave to friends who needed food or gas money rather than to the church we were attending. To tell the truth, that occasionally came with a feeling of guilt, wondering if I was going to be spiritually unprotected because I wasn’t meeting the 10% rule.

A few observations:

• Tithing was an Old Testament mandate with a blessing and a curse attached to it. Can we have one without the other? Can we say Christians will be blessed for giving 10%, as a rule, without teaching that they come under a curse if they don’t strictly tithe as the Jews were commanded to do?

• Tithing was mandated under the Mosaic law within a specific economic context of no additional taxes (like we pay Federal and State); the tithe was the tax for Old Testament Israel as part of national systems related to economics, welfare and supporting the justice system

• The 10% rule isn’t taught in the New Testament as an expectation for Christ followers

• The only time Jesus mentions tithing is in the context of rebuking religious people who tithe meticulously, yet break the more weighty commands of justice, mercy and faithfulness

• Both Jesus and Paul say explicitly that the most important, overarching principle behind giving is the heart attitude

• Jesus said the woman who gave two copper coins gave more than anyone because it was all she had

• Paul commended the Philippians for giving above and beyond their means to help impoverished Christians

• Many wealthy believers in the Acts revival gave lavishly to meet the needs of the poor and create economic equality in the body; they certainly went beyond the 10% rule

What does all of this mean for the 10% rule? For one, I realize taking away the 10% as an expectation threatens revenue predictability, which churches in our culture need to create operating budgets so they can, with some level of dependability, pay staff and building costs. I’ve been on a church staff, so I can appreciate being able to count on a check every two weeks. Faithful giving keeps the lights on and lets the pastor know what the church can safely commit to. However, is it possible that in some cases the tail is wagging the dog?

It seems Jesus intentionally messed with this principle because he wanted to adjust priorities. In the New Testament, it was a shift from focusing on the physical temple and religious hierarchy as a thing of beauty and authority to the glory of the transformed heart and the body of believers as God’s true tent of meeting.

What’s going on at the root here? Just a question, not a judgment. I’d love to hear your feedback. Are you seeing things in the Scriptures that I’m missing?