Should Christians Give All of the Tithe to Local Church?
Christians often ask if they should give all of their tithe to the local church, or if they can give a portion of it to a ministry. To help find the answer, a Christian minister quotes preacher John Piper on his blog this weekend.
Chris Willard, director of generosity development at Leadership Network, takes up the issue of tithing on his personal blog, providing the transcript of a message by Piper, who served as pastor at Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis, Minn., for over three decades.
"There's no clear biblical mandate that your generosity has to be in a certain proportion to your church and to other ministries," Willard, who served with Campus Crusade for Christ for more than 25 years, quoted Piper as saying in a message on April 14, 2008....
John UK wrote: I read this passage this morning and pondered it a while. It appears to concern the indebtedness Gentiles have toward the Jews. Romans 15:25-27 KJV 25 But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints. 26 For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem. 27 It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things. Spiritual things are of the Jews. The Gentiles have been made partakers with them by the grace of God. And so these Gentiles were keen to assist the poor saints in Jerusalem, and did so. Am I reading this right?
Dil Emma wrote: Whole Counsel of God. KJV. Reformed and Protestant. Biblical Calvinist. Presbyterian. WCF, L/C. Canons of Dort. Three Forms of Unity. Reformed Creeds.
May I ask why on your response on 8/15/12 3:17 PM contained
"Philip a miracle worker... Acts 8:6 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done"
The text if from Acts 8:13(The baptism of Simon the Sorcerer), with a label Acts 8:6(The confirming miracles of Philips Preaching in Samaria)
I read this passage this morning and pondered it a while. It appears to concern the indebtedness Gentiles have toward the Jews.
Romans 15:25-27 KJV 25 But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints. 26 For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem. 27 It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things.
Spiritual things are of the Jews. The Gentiles have been made partakers with them by the grace of God. And so these Gentiles were keen to assist the poor saints in Jerusalem, and did so.
SteveR wrote: I have enjoyed this discussion you have shared with my dear brother in Christ John Uk. May I ask, what background of teaching do you draw upon for your responses? Creeds, catechisms, statement of beliefs that you feel best express your faith. Thank you
Whole Counsel of God. KJV. Reformed and Protestant. Biblical Calvinist. Presbyterian. WCF, L/C. Canons of Dort. Three Forms of Unity. Reformed Creeds.
Dil Emma wrote: John You picked two miracle workers for your theory. I'm sure they were very able to read the grace working in the early converts. They clearly required special abilities in God's eyes since that is what HE provided them with. Philip a miracle worker... Acts 8:6 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done And of Peter it says... Acts 5:12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people. Best stick to normal mortals for this discussion John.
Are you saying you are a normal mortal who needs a normal mortal mentor?
How then are you going to follow the Christ?
But hey, if I get your strange point, you are saying that Philip possessed something which we do not possess? Man, that is clutching at straws, and denying biblical precedents at a whim, brother!
Steve, feel welcome to join the discussion. Dilly follows the WCF no doubting it.
Dil Emma wrote: John You picked two miracle workers for your theory. I'm sure they were very able to read the grace working in the early converts. They clearly required special abilities in God's eyes since that is what HE provided them with. Philip a miracle worker... Acts 8:6 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done And of Peter it says... Acts 5:12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people. Best stick to normal mortals for this discussion John.
Dil Emma,
I have enjoyed this discussion you have shared with my dear brother in Christ John Uk. May I ask, what background of teaching do you draw upon for your responses? Creeds, catechisms, statement of beliefs that you feel best express your faith. Thank you
John UK wrote: Acts 8:35-38 KJV 35 Then Philip..... Would you censure Philip for baptising this new convert? Or Peter for baptising
John You picked two miracle workers for your theory. I'm sure they were very able to read the grace working in the early converts. They clearly required special abilities in God's eyes since that is what HE provided them with.
Philip a miracle worker... Acts 8:6 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done
And of Peter it says... Acts 5:12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people.
Best stick to normal mortals for this discussion John.
Dil Emma wrote: 2. Ah now there is the problem isn't it John. Do you use a human ability to weigh up? Or do you read the heart as God does? The flaw in the process...
Ahem
Observe:
Acts 8:35-38 KJV 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
Would you censure Philip for baptising this new convert?
Or Peter for baptising those thousands who professed repentance at pentecost?
Man, you've got to get a hold of biblical principles.
Galatians 1:23-24 KJV 23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. 24 And they glorified God in me.
John UK wrote: 2. weigh up very carefully the evidence of grace 2a. Now you can either say that grace does NOT evidence itself 2b. you take away from God the glory due unto him for his miracle of grace, 3. some tares will slip through. 4. the Presbyterian way of baptising all children 5. parents really ARE believers?
2. Ah now there is the problem isn't it John. Do you use a human ability to weigh up? Or do you read the heart as God does? The flaw in the process is being a mere human which results in your point 3. below. 2a. The positive nature of grace in Christian life emerges over time. For example when we become familiar with the individual witness of another person. This as I say takes time. 2b. I don't think any sinner can quote "take away" the glory from God. HE certainly does not require glory to come from sinners in the first place. 3. Tares being baptised is the point I would make to you. Your confession based baptism ceremony is no less dependent upon election to "catch" the elect than paedoBaptism is. We both rely upon God alone for full effect. 4. PaedoBaptism is according to Scripture, as far as age is concerned it is 'specified' in Gen 17. 5. Usually over 'time' ie experience of their personal witness among us.
Dil Emma wrote: Scared of the truth John? Baptists dunk non elect all the time and thus they've been fooled by millions of religious reprobates.
1. No, are you?
2. There are Baptists and Baptists. Just as there are Presbyterians and Presbyterians. The Baptist fraternity I agree with are the Particular Baptists, and these do not baptise to order, but weigh up very carefully the evidence of grace in a professing Christian's life.
Now you can either say that grace does NOT evidence itself, in order to make a decision, or if it DOES evidence itself, the evidence is inconclusive. Either way you take away from God the glory due unto him for his miracle of grace, whereby he creates anew and gives a new heart to a rebel sinner and converts him.
As with all baptisms, some tares will slip through. But the Presbyterian way of baptising all children of believing (believing?) parents will ensure that many more tares will enter the church.
BTW, how do you ascertain that the parents really ARE believers?
John UK wrote: Baptism is related to "dying with Christ". And it is related to "rising with Christ". And it is related to "the new birth". And it is related to "repentance and faith". If you baptise anyone who has experienced none of these things as yet, you give them a false hope, because as yet, the Lord has not called them
Has the Baptist church ever baptised a non elect person?
Dil Emma wrote: John How do you give babies false hope??? John How do you give unregenerate false hope??? "For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it."
The biblical "hope" is not the same as, "Well I hope it will be sunny tomorrow." It is a knowledge, a certainty. The "Christian hope" is not a case of, "Well I hope I get to heaven." Rather it is a sure and certain thing, for all who have repented of their sins and trusted in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Baptism is related to "dying with Christ". And it is related to "rising with Christ". And it is related to "the new birth". And it is related to "repentance and faith". If you baptise anyone who has experienced none of these things as yet, you give them a false hope, because as yet, the Lord has not called them.
Sure, by all means, let them attend church services, that they may hear the word of God, and see with their eyes the worship of the King, and be protected from the influence of the world. But to involve them without permission in religious sacraments is rather OTT IMHO.
John UK wrote: At least we PB's believe in election, and try very hard never to baptise the unregenerate and give them a false hope.
John How do you give babies false hope??? John How do you give unregenerate false hope???
"For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it."
good stewards wrote: This also confirms Genesis 17:10-12 Circumcision-'NOW' baptism of babies. So you Baptists better be careful and try not to be antinomian on ANY part of the Law.
At least we PB's believe in election, and try very hard never to baptise the unregenerate and give them a false hope.
But then, you believe that God is a respector of persons who saves based on genealogy, just like the unregenerate Jews believed.
"1. The whole Bible is law and gospel, and the two are so vitally related to each other that an accurate knowledge of either cannot be obtained without the other.
2. The law reveals the character of God and the condition of man. These two kinds of knowledge are absolutely necessary for salvation. (See, for example, the first chapter in Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion.)
3. The law is essential to true biblical evangelism because by the law is the knowledge of sin. It was the law that was effective in Paul's conversion: "I would not have known sin except through the law" (Rom. 7:7).
4. The law is the only biblical rule and direction for obedience--that is, a sanctified life. In what does sanctified behavior consist? Doing the will of God. What is the will of God in respect to morality? The moral law summarized in the Ten Commandments.
5. The law is one of three truths of the Bible that stand or fall together: (1) the law of God, (2) the cross of Christ, (3) the righteous judgment of almighty God. First, if there is no law there is no sin because sin is the transgression of the law (The Ten Commandments).
Second, if there is no cross there is no hope for poor sinners--no forgiveness of sin...." (E.Reisinger)
The law has passed away for those who a) know THEY can't keep it, b)know Christ did keep the whole law (even though he was accused of breaking it by the pharisees, that He paid the penalty of a common sinner (such as you and I)- death is the penalty for sin, and c)who then desires with all he's got to be like HIM. If he who was not a sinner, was condemned as a sinner, how much more the real sinner, by his repentance, is able to be made sinless by his death!
Thus grace abounds for the sinner, not the keeper of the law.
GetReal wrote: The fulfilment of the law is judgement day Good Servants. The law does not pass away because in the future lies judgement day
Who is "Good Servants"???
As Jesus Himself declares HE IS the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets, in other words the Old Testament prophecy. That is why we can proclaim the entire Bible is about Jesus OT and NT.
As indeed Jesus stated; Matt 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil" * THUS we perceive that Christ declares the Old Testament to be extant today. (Except for the small portion of ceremonial laws)
Further Jesus goes on to declare; "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." * THUS Christ confirms the Old Testament remains in force, and intact, - {including Sabbath and tithing} - By His very words of verification here declared!
btw This also confirms Genesis 17:10-12 Circumcision-'NOW' baptism of babies. So you Baptists better be careful and try not to be antinomian on ANY part of the Law.
Lurker wrote: I agree with what you mean, bro, but how you wrote it doesn't tell the whole story. Permit me to explain. If there were no fulfillment of the law until the last day then there would be no new covenant, mercy, grace, peace with God, redemption from the wrath of God, rest from the works of the law, no gospel. Jesus incarnate was the embodiment of the first covenant and Jesus crucifed is the embodiment of the second. For this reason, when one is in the first man Adam they are still in the first covenant; dead is trespass and sin, abiding in the wrath of God. Therefore, when Jesus said "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil" He was speaking of fulfiling the first covenant of His own body, nailing it to the cross, taking the debt of it out of the way (Col 2:14, Heb 10:20) so He could establish the second (Heb 10:9). Those who are not in the last man Adam (Christ crucified, the book of life), and He in them, abide in the first until the last day.
It is a good explanation, Lurker.
There is another law which we actually fulfil, the law of Christ.
89
There are a total of 108 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Dr. Alan Cairns | 9/21/2009
COMMENTS | 
