I was looking at the Nov teaching on the TWIt site. The article ....BUT they break all the research principles they teach.
THis is nothing new. I left the way in the mid '80s. They were never consistent in that regard.
Also their "research principles" are sufficiently overlapping for them to be able to choose the one they want so that it would illustrate a point that they wanted to make.
On top of that they had no training in logic. For example it was quite common that mere illustration was given as proof.
I always did find it funny that the Abundant Sharing teaching was about tithing and was backed up with Old Testament teachings. As far as I remember I was never shown the 10% rule in the New Testament. I asked about this a few times and was basicly told not to question leadership. My logic wasn't welcome very often.
I always did find it funny that the Abundant Sharing teaching was about tithing and was backed up with Old Testament teachings. As far as I remember I was never shown the 10% rule in the New Testament.
Cuz it ain't there. Not once. Not a single time. In fact, in teaching specifically on the subject of giving (II Corinthians), Paul spends a couple of chapters on the subject of giving, and not once does he mention 10% or any other percent. This would be understandable if he were writing to (former) Jews, for whom the 10% figure would be understood. But he was writing to (former) Gentiles, who never had any background in the tithe and would have needed such instruction if it was, in fact, God's minimum standard.
On top of that, I do not believe there is a single reference in the NT of people giving money to leadership or a church (church being defined as place of worship) for them to keep as salary or to use to "spread the word". Paul worked. He said he did so, because he did not want to take money from the people, even though he may have had a right to.
In every reference to collecting money in the NT, the money was being given to the poor. The specific situation which comes to mind immediately was the instance where there was a famine in Jerusalem.
The book of Hebrews in the NT mentions tithing, but the idea is that it pretty much was useless to give the tithe to the temple or high priest because Jesus Christ became our high priest. It pretty much says that tithing is useless because the temple is in the body of the born again believer and Jesus is the high priest. If tithing at all, the tithes would go to the church, but Hebrews does not go that far to say that. The idea here is that the Hebrew believers were still under the law giving a tithe to the temple and high priest.
There is no tithe for the New Testament believers. There is only giving, and giving as your heart purposes, mentioned in another epistle.
I think the law of giving and receiving supercedes tithing. If your attitude is to give you don't even have to think about a percent. It says give and it shall be given unto you. It doesn't say it has to be 10% before it kicks in. Tithing might be as training wheels if people aren't used to giving, but you can't buy God's grace, so why try?
The new testament says "you reap what you sow' and it says "as a man purposeth in his heart so let him give" Seems pretty simple to me.
That 10% tithing doctrine was a total rip-off. VeePee justified it by saying we should not do less than the tithe in the new administration. "Should we do less?"
Who were we giving to? to God? Maybe we thought we were. We were sending in our hard earned cash to HQ for them to do with WHATEVER they chose, accountable to no one.
If we dared ask where the money went, we were reproved. We trusted that God would bless us. We listened to Craig's rantings about God not spitting in our direction if it wasn't MORE than 10%. So not only did we end up under the LAW, we were MORE than under the law.
Totally perverse. A total rip-off.
How dare they.
Some of us were barely getting by and yet we still faithfully gave our 10%, 15%, 20% along with Corps Sponsorship, Love Offerings, and more.
Every church I know has a finance committee who oversees things. The committee is elected and they make the books public. Certain times of the year the books are in the church office for anyone and everyone to look at. They actually encourage it. I asked to see TWI's books and was put through the Spanish Inquisition, given vague b.s. answers and never provided any concrete information.
Craig used the scripture where they elected men to oversee the care of the widows so that the apostles didn't have to "wait tables" and he said that they shouldn't have to work. Totally taken out of context. The correct research keys clearly show that the "waiting on tables" was in reference to taking care of the widows.
They got stuck in the wrong administration and completely ignored "the 100 clear verses" on the subject exactly the same way they ridicule others for doing.
My ex had to teach on tithing and giving once and was in quite the quandry because he couldn't, in his own research, justify the teachings of TWI. He spoke to our hfc and our wc overseers about it and they "provided proper direction" for him to come around to seeing things TWI's way. It was sad, really. I thought it was going to be an eye-opening day for him, but, alas, the TWIts successfully glued those scales to his eyes.
In I Cor 9 Paul implies that he has a right to expect support but chooses not to. He also implies that those who teach should share in the physical as they share the spiritual. Paul compares this with the OT priest living off of the sacrifices and what is brought to the temple. So I don't see a problem with local ministers earning a living as long as they are working and teaching the locals.
As far as tithing, I don't see it in the NT. Just free will giving. And from what I can see it doesn't say to whome to give, just give and give because you want to.
Still tithing is not taught in the NT, only free will giving and for the most part
There are distinct differences between tithing in Malachi and giving of abundance in Corinthians. In Malachi, it mentions one-tenth of firstfruits and one-seventh of time. In Malachi, there are no specific penalties for not giving. Malachi simply asks if anyone would rob God. The benefits in Malachi, for giving, is that God would open up the heavens and pour out a blessing such as there would not be room enough to receive. So, Malachi says that a person should give, and a person should give 10% of firstfruits.
In Corinthians people are encouraged to give, without any indication or penalties or repurcussions for not giving. In Corinthians, people are encouraged to give of their abundance, not firstfruits. God loves a cheerful giver. God looks upon the heart. As a man sows, so shall he reap. So, the church epistles definite teach that giving is good, but there are no minimums or percentages.
TWI taught "abundant sharing" as necessitating the giving the 10%, then mandating one to give of the money left over after the 10% is figured in. That is not abundant sharing. That would be tithing plus abundant sharing, not something God commands us to do.
It is a matter of getting "to whom correct". The 10% was directed to people under the law. The encouragement to give of one's abundance is given to the church administration.
Also, VPW made the statement that we as believers should do more than those under the law. The Bible never says that. In most cases, we actually are supposed to do less than what OT believers did. We have 2 commandments rather than 800 plus. We are to love God... and love our neighbors... We don't have to do all the things OT believers did. In the grace administration, we can lead people into the new birth. That is the only thing I see people doing more of (the OT believers couldn't do it at all). That VPW's statement was adding to the Word, which means we no longer have the Word regading tithing and abundant sharing.
...There are distinct differences between tithing in Malachi and giving of abundance in Corinthians. In Malachi, it mentions one-tenth of firstfruits and one-seventh of time...
Where in Malachi or anywhere else does it mention giving 1/7th of time?
The sabbath, if that's what you are referring to, was a "rest", it wasn't giving anything
I don't know if it was vp, or someone else who described the Sabbath as a "tithe" of 1/7 of your time (linking it to the 10%), but I remember hearing it defined as such.
I agree Oak -- it is a rest, and not giving anything, although one could say that since it was required -- it might be construed as a tithe (of sorts), but I don't see it that way.
I saw the sabbath described as "giving one seventh of your time" in a Way Rag article by Loy, I believe entitled "The Tithe Doth Still Provide", but I never saw it elaborated upon.
It's rather interesting, isn't it, that TWI pushed administrations and what is written TO us. They belittled the Gospels, and exalted the Church Epistles as TO us. The Old Testament FOR OUR LEARNING etc etc.
BUT when it came to ABS, suddenly we have the tithe of the Old Testament magically being ok in the current administration.
Could it be because it had to do with MONEY???
And Vee Pee used to teach often how the love of money is the root of all evil.
So here's a guy who seems to understand how the love of money is an evil force driving much of the misery in the world, yet he himself took part of the same.
So here's a guy who seems to understand how the love of money is an evil force driving much of the misery in the world, yet he himself took part of the same.
You see this pattern all the time with leaders of every stripe - political leaders, moral leaders, business leaders. When someone is overly zealous instructing others the "right way" watch out.
Recommended Posts
My3Cents
THis is nothing new. I left the way in the mid '80s. They were never consistent in that regard.
Also their "research principles" are sufficiently overlapping for them to be able to choose the one they want so that it would illustrate a point that they wanted to make.
On top of that they had no training in logic. For example it was quite common that mere illustration was given as proof.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Georgio Jessio
I always did find it funny that the Abundant Sharing teaching was about tithing and was backed up with Old Testament teachings. As far as I remember I was never shown the 10% rule in the New Testament. I asked about this a few times and was basicly told not to question leadership. My logic wasn't welcome very often.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Cuz it ain't there. Not once. Not a single time. In fact, in teaching specifically on the subject of giving (II Corinthians), Paul spends a couple of chapters on the subject of giving, and not once does he mention 10% or any other percent. This would be understandable if he were writing to (former) Jews, for whom the 10% figure would be understood. But he was writing to (former) Gentiles, who never had any background in the tithe and would have needed such instruction if it was, in fact, God's minimum standard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheManOfa Thousand ScreenNames
***Posted by Abigail*********
On top of that, I do not believe there is a single reference in the NT of people giving money to leadership or a church (church being defined as place of worship) for them to keep as salary or to use to "spread the word". Paul worked. He said he did so, because he did not want to take money from the people, even though he may have had a right to.
In every reference to collecting money in the NT, the money was being given to the poor. The specific situation which comes to mind immediately was the instance where there was a famine in Jerusalem.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
The book of Hebrews in the NT mentions tithing, but the idea is that it pretty much was useless to give the tithe to the temple or high priest because Jesus Christ became our high priest. It pretty much says that tithing is useless because the temple is in the body of the born again believer and Jesus is the high priest. If tithing at all, the tithes would go to the church, but Hebrews does not go that far to say that. The idea here is that the Hebrew believers were still under the law giving a tithe to the temple and high priest.
There is no tithe for the New Testament believers. There is only giving, and giving as your heart purposes, mentioned in another epistle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
I think the law of giving and receiving supercedes tithing. If your attitude is to give you don't even have to think about a percent. It says give and it shall be given unto you. It doesn't say it has to be 10% before it kicks in. Tithing might be as training wheels if people aren't used to giving, but you can't buy God's grace, so why try?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outandabout
The new testament says "you reap what you sow' and it says "as a man purposeth in his heart so let him give" Seems pretty simple to me.
That 10% tithing doctrine was a total rip-off. VeePee justified it by saying we should not do less than the tithe in the new administration. "Should we do less?"
Who were we giving to? to God? Maybe we thought we were. We were sending in our hard earned cash to HQ for them to do with WHATEVER they chose, accountable to no one.
If we dared ask where the money went, we were reproved. We trusted that God would bless us. We listened to Craig's rantings about God not spitting in our direction if it wasn't MORE than 10%. So not only did we end up under the LAW, we were MORE than under the law.
Totally perverse. A total rip-off.
How dare they.
Some of us were barely getting by and yet we still faithfully gave our 10%, 15%, 20% along with Corps Sponsorship, Love Offerings, and more.
Greedy bastards.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
you're not kidding. greedy bastards. i can't believe they still live off people out in new knoxville.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Every church I know has a finance committee who oversees things. The committee is elected and they make the books public. Certain times of the year the books are in the church office for anyone and everyone to look at. They actually encourage it. I asked to see TWI's books and was put through the Spanish Inquisition, given vague b.s. answers and never provided any concrete information.
Craig used the scripture where they elected men to oversee the care of the widows so that the apostles didn't have to "wait tables" and he said that they shouldn't have to work. Totally taken out of context. The correct research keys clearly show that the "waiting on tables" was in reference to taking care of the widows.
They got stuck in the wrong administration and completely ignored "the 100 clear verses" on the subject exactly the same way they ridicule others for doing.
My ex had to teach on tithing and giving once and was in quite the quandry because he couldn't, in his own research, justify the teachings of TWI. He spoke to our hfc and our wc overseers about it and they "provided proper direction" for him to come around to seeing things TWI's way. It was sad, really. I thought it was going to be an eye-opening day for him, but, alas, the TWIts successfully glued those scales to his eyes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith
In I Cor 9 Paul implies that he has a right to expect support but chooses not to. He also implies that those who teach should share in the physical as they share the spiritual. Paul compares this with the OT priest living off of the sacrifices and what is brought to the temple. So I don't see a problem with local ministers earning a living as long as they are working and teaching the locals.
As far as tithing, I don't see it in the NT. Just free will giving. And from what I can see it doesn't say to whome to give, just give and give because you want to.
Still tithing is not taught in the NT, only free will giving and for the most part
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biblefan Dave
There are distinct differences between tithing in Malachi and giving of abundance in Corinthians. In Malachi, it mentions one-tenth of firstfruits and one-seventh of time. In Malachi, there are no specific penalties for not giving. Malachi simply asks if anyone would rob God. The benefits in Malachi, for giving, is that God would open up the heavens and pour out a blessing such as there would not be room enough to receive. So, Malachi says that a person should give, and a person should give 10% of firstfruits.
In Corinthians people are encouraged to give, without any indication or penalties or repurcussions for not giving. In Corinthians, people are encouraged to give of their abundance, not firstfruits. God loves a cheerful giver. God looks upon the heart. As a man sows, so shall he reap. So, the church epistles definite teach that giving is good, but there are no minimums or percentages.
TWI taught "abundant sharing" as necessitating the giving the 10%, then mandating one to give of the money left over after the 10% is figured in. That is not abundant sharing. That would be tithing plus abundant sharing, not something God commands us to do.
It is a matter of getting "to whom correct". The 10% was directed to people under the law. The encouragement to give of one's abundance is given to the church administration.
Also, VPW made the statement that we as believers should do more than those under the law. The Bible never says that. In most cases, we actually are supposed to do less than what OT believers did. We have 2 commandments rather than 800 plus. We are to love God... and love our neighbors... We don't have to do all the things OT believers did. In the grace administration, we can lead people into the new birth. That is the only thing I see people doing more of (the OT believers couldn't do it at all). That VPW's statement was adding to the Word, which means we no longer have the Word regading tithing and abundant sharing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
The sabbath, if that's what you are referring to, was a "rest", it wasn't giving anything
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I don't know if it was vp, or someone else who described the Sabbath as a "tithe" of 1/7 of your time (linking it to the 10%), but I remember hearing it defined as such.
I agree Oak -- it is a rest, and not giving anything, although one could say that since it was required -- it might be construed as a tithe (of sorts), but I don't see it that way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
I saw the sabbath described as "giving one seventh of your time" in a Way Rag article by Loy, I believe entitled "The Tithe Doth Still Provide", but I never saw it elaborated upon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outandabout
It's rather interesting, isn't it, that TWI pushed administrations and what is written TO us. They belittled the Gospels, and exalted the Church Epistles as TO us. The Old Testament FOR OUR LEARNING etc etc.
BUT when it came to ABS, suddenly we have the tithe of the Old Testament magically being ok in the current administration.
Could it be because it had to do with MONEY???
And Vee Pee used to teach often how the love of money is the root of all evil.
So here's a guy who seems to understand how the love of money is an evil force driving much of the misery in the world, yet he himself took part of the same.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
My3Cents
You see this pattern all the time with leaders of every stripe - political leaders, moral leaders, business leaders. When someone is overly zealous instructing others the "right way" watch out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
"The tithe doth still provide"- ha. I thought it was God that was supposed to provide..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.