May 26, 2006, by Russell Earl Kelly, Ph. D.

www.shouldthechurchteachtithing.com

Allan Meyer, Careforce Church, Mt Evelyn, Victoria, February 23, 2006 (Australia) [excerpts from end of speech]

Note: Meyer is one of the leading pastors in Australia.

Comments: Allan Meyer's entire argument for NT support of tithing is placed on his interpretation of First Corinthians 9:13-14.

Meyer: "Now, the question is, what does the New Testament have to say about tithing? And where this is best processed, and in most detail, is found in 1 Corinthians and chapter nine. ... The context underlines and in big bold letters says this: what I'm about to tell you is a very significant principle of New Testament life." [discusses 9:7-11].

1 Cor 9:13 "Don't you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar?"

1 Cor 9:14 "In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel."

1 Cor 9:15 But I have not used any of these rights. ... NIV

Meyer: [9:14] "By the same principle. Now in the NIV it reads, "in the same way", but the Greek text at that point is rightly translated by the Amplified Bible with these words, "by the same principle." The principle that I have just mentioned is now to be applied in the following case. That's what that Greek little term means. By the same principle, the Lord has commanded! Say that word with me. The Lord has commanded. This is not a suggestion. This is a commandment. It is not an apostolic command, it is a divine command. ... But now the apostle Paul says, in the same way and by the same principle the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel. How? By the same principle. That principle, that principle running right through the Old Testament, where God's workforce were looked after by the tithe is to be applied in the New Testament context as the way in which God's workers in the New Testament will be supplied."

KELLY: Comments from the Context of Paul's Presentation:

The source of pay is determined by the type of service.

All partake of the fruits of their work -whatever it is (9:10). Spiritual sowers (of the gospel) have a right to reap material benefits from those whom the gospel affected (9:11).

1. Soldiers have a right to be paid from the spoils of war (9:7).

2. Vineyard workers have a right to drink what he grows (9:7).

3. Goat herders have a right to drink from those goats (9:7).

4. The ox has a right to eat what he is grinding (9:9).

5. Those who work in the Temple [all Levites] have a right to get their food through Temple laws/principles (9:13a) and those who serve at the altar [priests] have a right to eat food which they offered on the altar [through law principles] (9:13b).

6. Those who preach the gospel have a right to live through gospel principles of giving (9:14).

7. But I have not used any of these rights. NIV

Each group had a 'right' to share from that which they worked.

Meyer's Interpretation of 1 Cor 9:13, 14: "In the same way; by the same principle; even so" which begins verse 14 connects verse 14 only to verse 13. It means "Just as Temple workers were paid by tithes and offerings [9:13], by the same principles gospel workers are paid by tithes and offerings [9:14]."

Kelly's Comments: "In the same manner" which begins verse 14 refers to all of 9:7, 9 and 13]: "Just as all six of the examples demonstrate that one is nourished by the work (or venue) from which he labours, in the same manner gospel workers live by gospel principles from which they labour." Verse 14 is not an extension of only verse 13 which goes from Law principles to Law principles. Rather verse 13 is a final example of verses 7-9 and switches from Law principles to gospel principles. Verse 15's "these rights" (NIV) refers to everything mentioned in verses 7-9 and 13 -not merely verse 13.

Comments: Meyer is correct when he says context is the key. However he limits the context of 9:14 to 9:13 and ignores the context of 9:7-13.

Chapter 8 concluded with a "principle" of how one should act concerning things that might offend others, especially food offered to idols. On the one hand the Jewish Christian wanted to buy food from the pagan marketplace which had previously been offered to idol. He was not offended because those idols were not gods at all (8:1-6). However, on the other hand, Gentile Christians who had been converted from idol-worship had their faith shaken when observing Christians eat such food (8:7). The issue was not the food itself (8:8). The issue was risking offending a fellow believer by exercising your 'freedom" to eat what you desired (8:9). Those who not balance their 'rights' and 'freedoms' as Christians actually sin against Christ (8:11-12). The principle: "Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause him to fall (8:13)."

Chapter 9 continues the argument. However, in this chapter Paul has been offended because the Corinthian church had given some gospel support to some of the other disciples and had not offered it to him. He was also offended that some did not accept his discipleship and calling by God.

Paul was in a lose-lose situation. If he demanded and received gospel support, then some in the church would accuse him of preaching for gain. Also some who supported him would try to control him (9:1-3).

Verses 4-27, the remainder of the chapter, is in the format of a lawyer's legal defence: "This is my defence to those who sit in judgment on me." However, after presenting enough convincing arguments to win his case, Paul immediately chose to live by the principle of 'liberty' rather the principle of 'right" in this particular instance.

Presenting the Case for Gospel [not Law] Support:

(1) We (missionaries with Paul) have the 'right' to eat and drink like everybody else. (9:4) (2) We have the 'right" to carry our wives along with us on missionary journeys like others (9:5). (3) Barnabas and I were legitimately sent out by the church at Antioch (9:6). (4) Three human examples of common-sense rights: Soldiers get paid. Farmers eat what they grow. Herdsmen drink milk from their flock (9:8-9). (5) Two examples from the Law: the ploughman and the threshing animal both have a right to eat from the harvest (9:10).

Closing Arguments:

9:11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?

9:12a If others have this right of support from you, shouldn't we have it all the more?

Paul's 180-degree Turn:

9:12b "But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ."

Having won his judicial argument and having proven his case, Paul then refused to accept gospel support from the Corinthian church! Why did he deny his 'right'?

The Principle of Tithing in the Mosaic Law:

9:13 "Don't you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar?"

The Temple in Jerusalem was still in full operation when this was written in approximately AD 55. From the wording of Acts 15 and 21:17-21 it is almost certain that Jewish Christians were still bringing both tithes and offerings, not to the church, but to the Temple. The Jerusalem church had not released its Jewish members from their obligations to the Temple and they still worshipped there daily (Acts 2:46). Without a doubt Paul agreed that the 'principle' for the support of Levites and priests was tithes and offerings.

First Corinthians 9:14 Explained

Just as Temple and altar workers still have a right (through the Law) to eat (tithes and offerings), even so Gospel workers have a right to be supported by the principles of the gospel.

Meyer: [9:14] By the same principle, the Lord has commanded! Say that word with me. The Lord has commanded. This is not a suggestion. This is a commandment. It is not an apostolic command, it is a divine command.

Kelly's Comments: If this were truly a divine command and not merely a strong suggestion, then Paul immediately transgressed it in verses 15-19. The Greek word, dietaxen, translated "commanded" in 9:14 is also translated "ordained," "appointed" and "set in order." The command does not teach that all gospel workers should be full-time. For the first three centuries of church history, extreme asceticism was common for leaders, even looking forward to martyrdom. They were expected to work other jobs. From the fourth century onwards the "apostolic poverty" for leaders followed Jesus' teachings from Matthew 10:10 and 19:21. Read several good books on early church history!

Paul Rejected Those Rights and Chose Liberty

1 Cor 9:15 But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me. I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast.

1 Cor 9:16 Yet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!

1 Cor 9:17 If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me.

1 Cor 9:18 What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make use of my rights in preaching it.

1 Cor 8:19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. NIV

OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE PRESENTATION:

Meyer: The Pharisees who were rich middle class businessmen.

Kelly's Comments: What exactly is a "rich middle class"? The Pharisees were fanatical about Sabbath-keeping, circumcision and tithing. They formed their own groups and only bought and sold among themselves in order to be assured that the tithes had been paid. In Acts 15 and 21 Jewish Christian Pharisees wanted to force Gentile converts to keep the entire Mosaic Law -especially their three favourites. In Acts 21, 30 years after Calvary, they were still zealous of the Law and expected tithes to be paid -not to the church-but to the Jewish Temple. History records that their fanaticism eventually rejected Paul, ripped it away from orthodox Christianity and destroyed that church. They also taught extreme asceticism and poverty was required to please God. See Ebionirtes and Elkaisites.

Meyer: Apostolic Hermeneutics [means] doing the same thing with the Old Testament that Jesus and the apostles did.

The New Testament does not seek to tell us everything that God thinks about a subject.

Kelly's Comments: Agreed, but Paul did say that he had presented the whole Gospel to the church. Is it right to discipline a church member based on an interpretation of a doctrine that is only taught in the Old Testament?

Meyer: You've got to build a picture first of what the Old Testament taught. ... You know that the first mentioning of tithing in the Bible is Genesis 14. ... It's the first time in the Bible the tithe is ever mentioned.

Kelly's Comments: Meyer's brief picture of what the OT taught in Genesis 14 is missing most key points. For the following reasons, Genesis 14:20 cannot be used as an example for Christians to tithe. (1) The Bible does not say that Abraham "freely" gave this tithe. (2) Abraham's tithe was NOT a holy tithe from God's holy land produced by God's holy people. (3) Abraham's tithe was only from spoils of war common to many nations. (4) In Numbers 31, God only required 1% of spoils of war. (5) Abraham's tithe to Melchizedek was a one-time recorded event and Abraham moved often. (6) Abraham's tithe was not from his own personal property. (7) Abraham kept nothing for himself; he gave everything back. (8) Abraham's tithe is not quoted anywhere in the Bible to endorse tithing. (9) Genesis 14, verse 21, is the key text. Since most commentaries explain verse 21 as an example of pagan Arab tradition, it is contradictory to explain the 90% of verse 21 as pagan, while insisting that the 10% of verse 20 was God's will. (10) If Abraham is an example for Christians to give 10% to God, then he should also be an example for Christians to give the other 90% to Satan, or to the king of Sodom! (11) Since neither Abraham nor Jacob had a Levitical priesthood to support, they had no place to bring tithes during their many moves.

Meyer: Now five things! First of all, are any of those significant? Well! The Bible says in the book of Hebrews that Melchizedek is a picture in the Old Testament of the ministry of Jesus Christ. It's probably fairly significant! Second, Hebrews even says that his name was significant. He's the King of Righteousness. And he's the King over a city called Salem. He's the Prince of Peace. Salem is the first mention of Jerusalem, the city, God's peace, God City of peace. So he comes out. He's the first pers on in the Bible ever to be called a priest.

Kelly's Comments: Meyer's references to Hebrews wanders. Hebrews was written to convince Jewish Christians that the Levitical priesthood which received tithes had failed and must be replaced by Christ's Melchizedek priesthood which was not dependent on the Law for its existence and success. (Heb 7:5, 12-19). Tithing was merely used to demonstrate that Christ was superior to Levi, Aaron and Abraham.

Meyer: What then makes it interesting is that when under Moses in Numbers chapter 18, that God establishes the priesthood, you've got to ask the question, how did he pay for that priesthood? How did God's workforce get paid? And the answer is very simple. In Numbers 18, God sets aside a tithe, and by the way, the first tithe.

Kelly's Comments: Read Numbers 18:20-28. The first tithe paid the salaries of the Levites who were only the servants to the priests. (1) Tithe money today does NOT follow the command in Numbers 18 (and 1 Chron 23-27) and pay the salaries of the deacons, choir, doormen, janitors and builders of the tabernacle. (2) One tenth of the tithe today does NOT pay only the salaries of the priests (pastoral staff). (3) Those who receive tithes today are NOT denied rights to inherit and own land. (4) Tithe recipients today are not organized in 24 courses of pastoral staff and Levites who take turns and only serve as pastors every 24^th week as in the OT. Again, read Numbers 18 and related passages.

Meyer: If you study your Old Testament, you'll realize that there were at least three tithes. This is the first one. The first tithe.

Kelly's Comments: Biblical tithes never included money. There are 15 verses from 11 chapters and 8 books from Leviticus 27 to Luke 11 which describe the contents of the tithe. And the contents never included money, silver, gold or anything other than food! Yet the incorrect definition of "tithe" is the greatest lie being preached about tithing today! (See Lev. 27:30, 32; Numb. 18:27, 28; Deut. 12:17; 14:22, 23; 26 12; 2 Chron. 31:5, 6; Neh. 10:37; 13:5; Mal. 3:10; Matt. 23:23; Luke 11: 42). Craftsmen and tradesmen were not required to tithe. Do not merely state that this is wrong because of your so-called Apostolic Hermeneutics" -be a Berean and prove it from God's Word.

Meyer: Once the Levites had been established as God's workforce, eleven tribes were told to bring their tithes so that their wages could be paid.

Kelly's Comments: Why? Because they were not allowed to own or inherit property. Tithe-recipients cannot justify owning and inheriting property today.

Meyer: Should one of God's ministers be paid fifty percent of what other people earn? He's set aside eleven tithes, a hundred and ten percent, for this one tribe. In other words, God pays just a little more than the average.

Kelly's Comments: According to Numbers 18:20-28 the tithe ---10 of those 11--- portions paid the Levites who were the janitors, guards, wood-cutters, animal skinners, and craftsmen of the tabernacle and temple. The pastors (priests) got the other 1% plus various offerings.

Meyer: He makes sure that yeah, you're not set on some pedestal but neither are you struggling. He sets aside his workforce, and he deals with them gracefully and equitably.

Kelly's Comments: The Levites and priests were actually supposed to identify themselves with the very poorest in the land, probably to keep them humble. The third tithe, called the "poor tithe," stayed in the homes every third year and was used to feed the poor and the Levites (Deut. 14:28, 29; 26:12,13).

Meyer: Now, he also asked them to bring a second tithe. The second tithe was for holiday. Five weeks is approximately a tithe of 52 weeks is five weeks of the year. God said put aside a tithe, so that you can three times come up to Jerusalem in a year and take time off and worship. A week for the Passover, a week for Pentecost, three weeks for the harvest celebration. Five weeks off a year!

Kelly's Comments: Are church members today required to save a second 10% to use for church retreats?

Meyer: Ministers need to take this to heart. God said, you need to take five weeks a year, and take at least one three week block to give your body an opportunity to recover from the damage of working really hard.

Kelly's Comments: The opposite was true in the OT. The PEOPLE were on holiday -not the priests! During those 5 weeks the priests were extremely busy performing many extra temple duties and extra sacrifices.

Meyer: 1 Cor 9:12 They had a right of support. Shouldn't we have it all the more? But we did not use this right! That's the context, can't address that. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.

Kelly's Comments: When he gets to the very heart of what Paul was teaching, Meyer says "That's the context, can't address that."

Meyer: Now suddenly he reverts to Numbers chapter 18. This is the quote. Numbers 18, 20 to 24 is now being quoted. He says this.

Kelly's Comments Wrong! Read Numbers 18:20-24. It is not being "quoted" here by Paul. He was merely making a general reference to the fact that Temple workers (Levites and priests) ate food provided by the Temple laws of tithes and offerings.

Meyer: 1 Cor 9:14's "The Lord has commanded." ... I don't know where he said this, just like I don't know where Jesus said it was better to give than to receive. Wherever he said it, it wasn't recorded, other than by the remembrances of the disciples.

Kelly's Comments: Most commentaries guess that this is a reference to Matthew 10:10 "for the workman is worthy of his food" or Luke 10:7 "the labourer is worthy of his hire." Both instances reflect temporary extreme ascetic living while actively on an evangelistic journey. The quotation "it was better to give than to receive" appears in Acts 20:35 and is Paul's command for church elders to work and care for the needy in the church (just the opposite of how it is used today). Acts 20:29-34 is Paul's reminder that he had worked in Ephesus for 3 years to pay for al of his needs and for the needs of those with him. These are hardly supports for tithing to support full-time pastors.

Meyer: Now, what about offerings? Well, offerings are really worth looking at. When you look at the way in which offerings were given in the Old Testament, and by the way tithes are a portion of an offering, when you go back to Numbers chapter 18, he describes that first tithe as one of the offerings that God's people bring to Himself. The Old Testament view of offerings was complex and extensive. For example, there were three tithes in Israel. The first tithe was for the priesthood. The second tithe was for holidays.

Kelly's Comments: Twice this had been explained in error. The non-tithe offerings in Numbers 18 only went to the priests and not the Levites. On the other hand the first tithe was NOT for the priesthood -it only went to the Levites, the servants to the priests. The priests only received one tenth of the first tithe.

Meyer: The third tithe was for compassion for giving to the poor. You could give to a priest. In fact you could give it to anybody but just bless somebody with that third tithe, and on top of that there were all kinds of offerings.

Kelly's Comments: As previously mentioned, this tithe was kept at one's home and was given to the poor which was to include the poor Levites and priests.

Meyer: I think the third tithe is largely covered today by our taxation processes where the government takes it off us and redistributes to the poor, and it's kind of like a third tithe which is applied compulsorily in a western country.

Kelly's Comments: the Mosaic Law was an indivisible whole. Transgression of one part meant transgression of the whole. If the church is required to pay the first tithe, then it is also required to pay the second and third tithe. Government taxation does not remove an obligation from churches to care for the poor.

Meyer: Johnny Ortiz ... said it is not right for a church to use the Bible to encourage people to tithe if the leadership are not willing to use the Bible in the spending of the tithe.

Kelly's Comments: If you are going to use the Bible to teach mandatory tithing, then you should also use it to teach all three tithes and establishment a Levitical system of paid full-time deacons, choir members, singers, door watchers, bakers and maintenance personnel to receive the first tithe.

Meyer: We are going to try to pay our people in a way that they are not being paid half of what other people get.

Kelly's Comments: This is neither scriptural nor following Christ's example. Until Christianity became a state church, its leaders boasted about their extreme poverty.

Meyer: The Lord has commanded that in the same way the Levites were installed, those who preach the Gospel should be paid by the same principle.

Kelly's Comments: For the third time, the Levites who received the first tithe were NOT preachers -they were servants.