While DeYoung notes
that when Jesus said the words contained in Matthew 23:23 He was
still under the Old Covenant, he quickly points us to 1 Corinthians
9:13-14. I'm very impressed by DeYoung's reference to this verse. In
my book You Mean I Don't Have to Tithe?, I list twenty
arguments for tithing in order of weakest to strongest, and this
verse was the second strongest argument for tithing (in my opinion)
and it is hardly ever utilized in pro-tithing resources.
As is usually the
case, paying close attention to context will radically change the way
this verse is used, however. Sometimes we have difficulty
understanding the context of a passage because the chapter break was
placed in an unfortunate spot. This is one of those examples. See,
the content of 1 Corinthians 8 is essential for understanding what
Paul is trying to communicate in 1 Corinthians 9.
1 Corinthians 8 is
Paul discussing food sacrificed to idols. In short, he says that
while there is nothing inherently wrong with eating food that has
been sacrificed to an idol, if it causes your fellow Christian to
stumble, you should not act on the right to eat the food. So, Paul
says to restrain your liberty if it hinders your fellow Christian. 1
Corinthians 9 begins with an ILLUSTRATION of restraining liberty. It
is not a new topic, but a continuation of 1 Corinthians 8.
So Paul says in 1
Corinthians 9 that those who work have a right to receive wages; he
then gives several proofs of this concept; and then he explains that
he restrains his liberty/freedom/right to get wages for the sake of
other Christians.
Structure of the
Argument
I. Discussion on
food sacrificed to idols
II. Conclusion:
restrain your liberty for the sake of other Christians
A. Illustration
1. Workers
deserve wages
a)
Arguments from the natural order
1)
soldiers receive wages
2)
farmers receive wages
3)
shepherds receive wages
b)
Arguments from the Old Testament
1)
Deuteronomy 25:4 and oxen who tread out the grain
2)
priests who served at the altar
2.
Conclusion to Illustration: vs. 15: “But I have made no use
of any of these rights ...”
This
is the context of the argument. So, could Paul be arguing that
ministers of the gospel (vs. 14) should be paid “in the same way”
as priests? In saying that you encounter several problems, including
that you would have to disconnect the previous four arguments from
“in the same way” and assume that Paul is now ONLY building off
of the last one. But there are three OTHER problems with leveraging
this verse for tithing:
1)
No priest received ten percent of his income from the Israelites. I
discussed earlier the “priestly tithe” mentioned in Numbers 18
for this very reason: priests received a “tithe of the tithe,”
or, one percent. Of course, since multiple tithes were given, that
wouldn't be the total contribution received by the priest. So, if
this verse is arguing that ministers of the gospel should be paid
like priests, then they receive about 2.3 percent, not ten (that's
ten percent of the 23% received by the Levites). Sadly and
ironically, this is about the average giving today.
2)
The overarching context is about rights and forgoing rights. Notice 1
Corinthians 9:15 above where Paul explicitly says he has “made NO
USE
of any of these rights.” Now, if this is stating that ministers of
the gospel should receive 2.3 percent in contributions, that would
have to be explained alongside of the idea that Christians would only
need to give 2.3 percent if the pastor did not forgo his right to a
salary. In other words, it's not that Christians HAVE TO give this
“2.3 percent tithe,” but they only have to give it if the
minister of the gospel decides he wants a salary.
3)
If you thought what was just written was a little confusing ... then
good! It is true that tithing was not a strictly Jewish practice.
However, the way Gentiles practiced tithing varied GREATLY from
Jewish tithing. So, if Paul was going to incorporate the Mosaic Law
of tithing into the New Covenant, an he would need to explain to both
Jews and Gentiles how it would carry over ... but especially for the
Gentiles. How could Paul expect the Gentiles to have such a nuanced
understanding of the Mosaic Law?
While
DeYoung has utilized the best Pauline verse for tithing in his
sermon, this verse cannot carry the weight of the tithing argument.
DeYoung does cite other texts in 1 and 2 Corinthians, but none of
them explicitly nor implicitly refer to tithing. Next we will discuss
Hebrews 7:1-10 and Melchizedek's tithe to Abraham.
No comments:
Post a Comment