Blogtext: "My marriage broke down, am I going to hell?"

"If you divorce and remarry you will surely go to hell."

"God hates you for divorcing your wife"

"If your marriage breaks down you no longer have a calling from God"



This list can be extended for a considerable length and I can vouchsafe that lots of stronger invectives have been levelled at me over the years. Yes I am a divorcee and not just once but thrice. My embers must be stoked hot waiting for me?


Nobody is in any doubt: marriage is under fire in the most heinous and final way. Some still weep over it, most seem to shut their eyes, and a rousing cheer of dismissal is volleyed around by a very vocal and growing minority with Major ambitions.


Nothing appears to get the gall boiling in the Devil than a biblical God-based marriage. Satan has devised a million temptations and and trials for what, lacking a better word, is called: a Christian marriage. Large parts of what calls itself 'the Church', also in want of a better word, has long forsaken the biblical model for marriage and is found accepting any travesty of marriage in the  name of 
inclusiveness and contemporary morals. Under the flag of Pride and Gender equality and in order to appease and divert some of the heavy flack from the LGBTHQ community, Church after Church, Denomination after Denomination has folded into the very camp of sinners that God has once and for all judged as a 'no go zone' for His people.

Incidentally, those who want to do away with Christian Marriage are also chronically weak in their theology of evil. Evil is only that which opposes the freedom under the "rainbow". To stand up for God's marriage model is the true sin according to these latter day prophets. 

Marriage breakdown begins at poor marriage making skills


What are the requirements for marriage? The answer depends on what you understand by marriage. In the modern framework nothing more is required by law than reaching the age of consent, having some sort of partner in sight, (even self marriages are now on offer) and seeing an official registrar of civil status change.
If they also have the gender specific body parts they are then legitimately allowed to produce either children or body parts of children for the pharmaceutical industry through the abortion clinics.
How they are set up financially, sociologically, and individually is their own business. But this independence only last as long as they make it. In the welfare state their failings will be the burden of the rest of society.  Society no longer protects the original marriage idea as the Judeo Christian pattern has been for over 2000 years. And we all pay for it. Someone ought to calculate the cost for the collapse of a structure that while it had lots of problems, still safeguarded some elementary social balance. 
(I may later make a summary of a book that was produced in the 1930 by Oxford Professor J D Unwin "Sex and Culture".)

In order to be allowed to drive a motorized or open road vehicle in any country you are by law required to have some proven knowledge of the vehicles and their functions, you need to know the Laws and regulations governing traffic and you have to show that you master the technology of driving. That is minimum.  You must even prove that you have some sort of ability to consider the other people on the roads, i e  basically to have some common sense.

None of that applies for entering marriage in the secular society! Rather modernity proclaims 'anything goes', and is expected to assume responsibility for when the 'anything goes' turns into 'everything goes wrong'.

What about the Church?
Here too now gradually the worldview of 'anything goes' is spreading its poison
.
But it was no so from the outset. There have always been conditions for marriage and 'if all else fails' read the instructions!  They are simple but not obvious. When we meet them we have mostly no prior experience of marriage. Therefore we must take them on trust and by faith in Him who gave the instructions. Looking at how our own parents have done would only be good if they had done it right. But it is impossible to know if they have since we as their children are 'the proof of the pudding'. We are holding the cards for success or failure too close to our chest to see where it is going. 

So we must have an objective external standard to build on. It is and has been there in plain sight since the world of mankind began. And it was written down for our instruction. Here it is: Genesis 2:18-26

'Then the Lord God said,"It is not good for man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him."'

I note: The idea of marriage is not the idea of man but of His Maker. That is where the normal mating modes differ between mankind and every other kind of being. The very mechanisms of attraction and dependence are produced by the intelligent designer and maker of man. Leave God out of the reckoning and what is left is mating for procreation. The animal world is left to instinct and natural urge built in to them, man is made to follow instruction in order to safeguard instincts.

‘But for Adam there was not a helper found for him.
’

Further I note that it is not merely for this or that specific shortcoming that man needs woman but for all of him. God never says: ‘Oh He can’t cook so he needs a kitchen servant.’ Or ‘Oh he can’t reproduce on his own so he better have a birthing partner.’ There is a world of difference between marrying someone for what use I have of them and marrying someone without whom I myself am incomplete. It is also the difference between: ‘I love you because’ and the ‘I love you regardless of secondary causes.’ The former is what we know best. The second is the ‘Agape’ of God. Without the Maker marriage is a dicey business. Trying to love without the Love from above can bring spectacular failure.


You see once the specific needs have been met that partner is no longer needed. And from ‘not needed’ to not wanted the step is very short. “
It is not good for man to be alone.” Is it any better to be alone for the woman? Well when God said those specific words, woman did not yet exist. In the next chapter of Genesis we see the effects of man leaving his woman alone. Without a murmur of interference he allows her to be set about by the serpent. Leaving her alone to contend for their lives, even while seemingly present in body but absent in every other way. How many wives can readily identify that situation? ‘His body is there in the room, but the rest is on old Trafford!


I also take notice that none of the animals was suitable to complement man however useful they are for a myriad other things in life. It is part of our resounding failure as men that women often have had lower status than any number of animals. You may recall Samson’s words about his woman when she had finally managed to get the clues of a riddle out of him and he has to acknowledge defeat: ‘If you had not plowed with my heifer you would not have found out my riddle.’ Women treated as of lesser value than animals are no news. ‘ That is where the very terminology of values leaves many with a shamed face. ‘You stupid cow.’

“This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh.’

We retain the phrase in our ‘marriage orders’ when we proudly proclaim: ‘What God has joined together, let no man put asunder’. And then we declare them to be one flesh because they are now formally married. As if the marriage ritual could create this oneness. As if the ritual could override the distance between them that was caused by the fall. It cannot. Only if they are joined in and by the Lord in a spiritual union as well as a physical one will some vestiges of the original be made possible. All hell is set against it!

What do I mean by that? In Genesis 1:26 we are told: ‘
Then God said,”Let us make man in Our image, according to our likeness.’ And again in Gen 5:1 ‘In the day that God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and female; and blessed them and called them Man in the day they were created.’ Man as male is not the image of God on his own. Woman as female is neither the image of God on her own. Male and female joined by God are the image of God since both beings come out of God, fashioned and formed in different ways for one common purpose: let the Earth be ruled by the Image of God! The events of chapter 3 in Genesis started a violent campaign against marriage in order to quench and crush the Image of God on earth and to bring the Maker and Sustainer of all life into disrepute among his subjects. That is why a broken marriage is more than the mishap of two individuals, it is an onslaught on the very image of God.

But you see the formality of a marriage ritual in no way guarantees that the union we celebrated was what God put together. That depends on a few other factors. Very vital ones at that.

Marriage as a Gift of Grace


The teaching of the Word of God regarding marriage is th
at it is a ‘charismata’, a gift of grace. It is for a believer not left up to his or her personal ‘I want’, but it is a seeking the face and will of God and the receiving of the gift for either a life in marriage, which has severe limitations as to what you can do, or a life in celibate service where you have one aim only and that is to serve Christ in whatever service. Matthew 19 and 1 Cor 7 give you all the pieces of that puzzle. And that Gift of grace needs all of grace to be upheld.

“What God has put together” and ‘Be not unequally yoked’ belong together.

Does God then put together individuals because they or their relatives or their teachers or ministers want it for them, regardless of their individual relationship to God? The one hour pre-marital pep-talk rarely does more than make a most cursory survey of their faith in God. Often enough they are simply saying ‘yes we believe in God and the Lord Jesus’. But are the two agreed on what that means? Men who want women will ‘shadow convert’ for the gain of a woman and vice versa. If I want this young and beautiful virgin and the only way to get her is to say yes at an altar call, then many a young man, unfounded in his own existing faith, may readily ‘pray the salvation prayer’. I know it first hand.


So speaking clearly: the two must both be independent Children of Light before they should be drawn towards marriage at all. Because to be unequally yoked means attempting to join darkness and light. ‘What fellowship can there be in such a union?’ Christ and Belial in union? Out of the question.

But that is not the only unequal yoke. The Donkey and the Oxen are forbidden as yoke partners for a very good reason. Strength, temperament and a lot of other parameters make such a union unbearable for either or both of them, and incidentally for God too, since he prohibits such unequal yokes.

Most of the matters that creep up during the marriage years after the wedding, were never up for discussion while they were starry-eyed romantics. It is when the children are born that you begin to think about things like ‘our views on childrearing‘. Disagreement there and children become a battle ground between the parents, read adults.

Or what about how they view money, work ethics, entertainment preferences, gender equality and a host of other issues that will intrude in their lives? It is very hard to tune the piano while playing the Moonlight Serenade. What you had never considered before will cause considerable strain afterwards. Caught unawares?
‘We didn’t have the slightest Idea this could become a problem.’ Of course not! You thought that you didn’t need driving lessons for this gigantically more important part of life! Your parents and your Church had no idea either. So you were left to run in a minefield barefooted hoping you would never tread on one. But oh my how wrong you were.

And when you hobbled home on one leg bleeding from the disaster of a broken marriage you were not met by sympathetic paramedics but by a stern fellowship lambasting you for divorcing your husband. Just before being ostracised in various ways.

I state it unequivocally: What the Church has not pre-empted and prepared for by consistent teaching and example, she has no right to chastise, judge or condemn in them who tried it on their own and failed. The Church first failed them. Never is it more appropriate than here to point out that he who points one accusing finger on the failing and fallen also points three fingers on himself.


“For this cause a man shall leave his Father and his mother, and shall cleave to His wife and they shall become one flesh.”

From this very condensed statement several things follow. The very verse is stated twice more in the New Testament by Jesus himself in Matthew 19/ Mark 10, and by His chosen spokesman Paul in Ephesians 5:31. Take note that Jesus insists on referring to ‘from the beginning’ which means that what was at the beginning has never changed. He had over 2000 years of history to look back on and nothing in God’s plan and purpose and plan had changed over that time. Bringing the obvious corollary: why should another two thousand years further along make any difference?

Note: “C
leaving cannot be done before the leaving is done.”
The image used is similar to the gluing together of two materials. If you have repaired a bicycle tyre you know what you had to do. Find the hole first. Clean up and rough up the surface around it with sand paper and then apply a coat of glue on the now clean surface as well as some on the patch. Then when both surfaces thus were ready you applied the patch and pressed down evening out any possible air bubbles.

Unless the one wanting to marry has left, grown out of, finished by growth the relationship of Child to Parents, and become an adult equal to the tasks of being that, then they should not marry.
Leaving is not ‘making a desperate dash for it to get out’, but a ‘having grown along the parental trellis until strong enough to continue growth beyond that support structure.’ Let me elaborate from my own experience over fifty years.

a. If you have not grown out of being a child you will find adult responsibility hard to bear, and will always be looking for some other ‘parent’ to help you because you are no adult yourself. And when you then cannot take the responsibility which you took upon yourself, for instance by having children, that would put a considerable strain on the marriage. I have met a few women who tearfully told me that when they had their child they suddenly found that they also had their spouse regressing to childhood.
Having one child is tough enough.

b. If you have not grown out of your childhood and become an independent adult you will look for substitutions for parents in your marriage partner. When for decades the wife finds herself being compared to his mother and even maybe accused of ‘not being as good as my Mother’ then that man has looked for a mother substitute in the woman he married.
Likewise many a girl whose Father failed her will unwittingly be looking for a father image of her own making in her possible partner. Only a rather immature man will want to be married to someone who mentally is his daughter. The issue of incest is dealt with in no uncertain terms in the law. It also is true that such a man maybe acting as a father as the result of never having had one. Compensating for a personal lack by adopting the role of what you never had is not uncommon.

Side note and issue: The partnerships sought by people that have been sexually abused as children tell some gruesome stories. Prisons have lots of child abusers who were abused as children. Support groups for abused women regularly have to face horrendous abuse carried out in ‘Christian homes’.

c. If you married to get away from your parents then your adhesive surface to your partner is dirty and the join will come unstuck if the slightest trace of what you ran away from shows up in your marriage. A ripped surface cannot be successfully glued on to another of the same kind and hope for a good bonding. Leaving is not ‘I hate you I am leaving’. It is: ‘Thank you for all you have done for me these 20 years, I am ready to stand on my own two feet now.’
I also note that a man must be able to be independent of his parents before he can take responsibility for someone else. Likewise the woman needs to be standing on her own as a woman before becoming someone’s spouse.

Put differently: It is a father’s role to lift the male child out of mother’s arms and train him to be a man before he attempts to become a father. It is equally the Father’s role to lift the female child out of the arms of the mother and assist her in growing into a woman before she becomes a wife and mother.

Missing the independence bridge between childhood and parenthood has serious warning flags and bodes unwell for the future. If Children in adult sized clothes marry they will become children who have children. Their children will remain children because they lack true role models. Take note of the consistent infantilisation across the entire culture during the last decades since the WW2.

And note this: Apart from the Orcas mankind is the only being that has about one third of life left after the end of fertility. All other animals die when they no longer are fertile, or they have no life outside their fertile years. Our parenting years are from about 20 to 45. If you never cultivate being adults before becoming parents then you will also find that once the children have left home your marriage may be under serious strain. If your major role for 20 plus years was being a parent, then you have allowed life to shrink. The years between 40 and 45 see the majority of divorces. Well, if you thought that the parenting years were the only important ones then you would have done nothing in preparation for the last third of your life except being good grandparents and feeding the birds.

Divorce does not happen out of the blue. And divorce is never only the fault of one partner in that marriage. The fault may rest in generations before.
“The sins of the Father’s run through to the third and fourth generations.” The Church is sadly very much lacking in any such insights.


I was given a folder at my grandmother’s death containing a number of Birth Certificates for the four generations before my own birth. Not one of them, for four generations, had been born in wedlock. I myself escaped being what was then and there known as being a ‘bastard’ by three weeks. Tell me more about generational sins…



The Teaching of Ephesians chapter five


You will have noticed by now that I am showing you lots of contributing factors to why marriage is such a very challenged way of life. And Satan hates it because of it being the one way in which the image of God is seen in the world. And that image is ultimately Christ. Which is clearly stated in Ephesians chapter five.


First Paul describes the order in the Church with Christ as the head, men in Christ being the heads of their households and women being their ‘suitable helpers’, because the husbands
‘love the wives as Christ loved the Church and gave himself for her.’ And their love for their wives is a love for themselves as no man hates his own flesh. And here again the foundational statement is made as it was in the beginning. ‘For this cause a man shall leave his Father and Mother and shall cleave to his wife and the two shall become flesh.’ And here he tumbles our minds by declaring: ‘This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the Church. Nevertheless let each individual among you also love his wife even as himself and let the wife see to it that she respects her husband.’

By the time you come to any kind of divorce, neither love nor respect nor submission to the Lord is any longer a going concern. In varying degrees both have long since stopped living a Christian Testimony. The Divorce is the sad end of a long series of processes that were never nipped in the bud. And when a Christian marriage fails it is a failing of the ‘Church in my house to preach Christ.’ Marriage is seen as a Prophecy of Christ and the Bride of Christ. No wonder Satan hates it. A Christian marriage in the Spirit is a constant sermon of Christ. Not very likely to be supported by the Evil one.

Root causes
The bitter streak of failure runs through many a love story gone wrong. And why did they?
‘They made me caretakers of vineyards, but I have not taken care of my own vineyard.’ And again: ‘Catch the foxes for us, the little foxes that ruin the vineyard.’
What may some of these processes that break down marriage be?


See 1 Corinthians 7 for some very important ones.
Not giving each other that for which one did marry. Depriving one another. Not fulfilling duties to each other. Using spiritual excuses for neglecting one another. Not praying together, not worshipping together, not playing together.


See 1 Peter 3 for some others. Not treating wives with due respect and concern is a hindrance to prayer. No man is a saint in the assembly whose wife stays home and weeps in despair over being treated as a lesser inheritor of the Grace of life.


See Hebrews 13:4 about the undefiled marriage bed. Who was it that famously said ‘there are three people in this marriage’? When the heart is captured by other possible partners in order to cope with the present one then the bed is defiled.

All may fall
Famous preachers have fallen for the temptations that readily are available wherever you turn. Satan targets the married because they are the visible image of God and of Christ and the Church. In fact men of authority and powerful speech and commanding appearance are especially targeted. Women frequently fall in love with such men. Not for their individual attractiveness but because of the power and charisma they exude. These powerful men who have such a wide ministry reaching so many people are an eyesore to Satan and he will do whatever he can to get them out of the pulpit. It is all about silencing the voice of God through them.

Trap them in adultery and fornication and their marriage soon collapses and their own Church will speedily complete the process of silencing that voice. Is that how God evaluates it? If you don’t catch them in the wrong bed then you may catch them red-faced with the hand in the cookie tin. Or snitching a few uncounted notes from the wrong till. Or see how the adulation of the mega churches blow up the status of mere men aiding a growth of their importance in public exposure, and pride will soon puff them up beyond the bursting point. The means are only important in the ‘scandalon’ they create. (Stumbling block)


Irrespective of how many have been blessed for decades, one such sin cancels out the entire work of that man. After having sown good seed in a thousand fields the man makes the mistake of sowing in one wrong field and he is done in permanently, by his own church, which not uncommonly became what it is because of his ministry.

Who was allowed to rob Job of all? And he had not even sinned!


Thus not infrequently the voices most needed at the time have been silenced because they fell into the honey traps of Satan. And the Church has no interest in rescuing them as burning brands out of the fire they get in. On the contrary. They are happy to pour petrol on the flames.
When I left my wife in 1985 I received a letter from one minister in whose Church I had been teaching. His message to me was curt and coarse:
‘Judas went and hanged himself, do thou likewise.’

The Church gives them up and forthwith ignores them. At the time they needed the support of the church they were left alone like Uriah the Hittite in the storming of Rabbah. (2 Samuel 11) They may live for years as shadows in some Church or other in ignominy and the gifts once so needed and desired are buried. ‘If one member suffers the whole body suffers.’

Does God recall his gifts and calling? No not according to His word and grace. But the Church has taken on her that task of silencing and gagging. By what reasoning is a man’s understanding of the word and the efficacy of Grace diminished or perverted by his sin of divorce and adultery? The ten years after I was defrocked and dismissed from the Church were silent years. Of the 750 members that I had served for 7 years three contacted me. One because I owed him money. One because he pressed the wrong button on his mobile phone and one, 1, to wish me a good Christmas, by text message. My wife, who was considered the victim of our divorce went Sunday by Sunday to the same Church and for one year nobody spoke to her. She later helped the Church with a personal loan in a time of financial Crisis. She received no thanks.

“ I hate divorce says the Lord”, and him who covers his garment with wrong. So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.’ Malachi 2:16

Judging from the way divorcees have frequently been treated in the Church the hatred of God against divorce is also spread over the divorcees by the Church. And the roll-back effect is that the sin of divorce is given a status next to the un-forgivable sin. Those who have failed in Love are barred from the Love of God because of sin. But it was their sins that set the Love of God in motion. He who divorces and remarries commits adultery and must therefore be kept out of the fellowship of the saints. He or she may have repented, but their deed is not forgotten. And it may also never be forgiven in any real sense. Forgiving without forgetting is a worm gnawing at grace. If they have re-married then their repentance demands that they leave that marriage and return to their former partner. Somehow this second divorce is justified as a means to rectify the former wrong. How another wrong corrects a first I have never been shown.

There is no foundation in scripture for attributing higher or lower levels of damnation to different sins. On the absolute contrary: he who has broken the law in one point has broken it in every point. And to make matters worse, Jesus clearly said that even the thought of lusting for another woman or man is as good as the actual act. Judging a brother or sister in whose shoes you have not stood in silence for even one moment is also a sin. Calling your brother a fool sets you up for hell fire. Many have said to me:
‘I am as guilty as you are, but I have never been caught actually doing it.’

Restoration
‘Brethren, even if a man is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one of you looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another’s burdens and thus fulfil the law of Christ.’
Restoration in biblical terminology is clearly set out in many places. It always means a giving back to the nation or to an individual what he has lost because of sin and misconduct, either his own or that of the world around. It means bringing back to full health. Restoring in full measure, well packed, shaken down and overflowing. Where the Church fails most dramatically is in this area.

But when those who have been through the mill and therefore have learnt a grace beyond grace, and have been forgiven so much still stay in the Church then they are gifts to the Church, gifts that would put feet under grace and be the best equipped to serve in grace.

But commonly a divorced minister is not again allowed in the pulpit. The reason? Well the Scripture is adamant that a bishop or overseer must be the husband of one woman.
So it is interpreted as meaning, a man who was married only to one woman in his life. What there is in scripture to support that interpretation I have yet to see.


Is it likely that a divorced man will justify his sin?
Is his teaching somehow contaminated, like leprosy contaminates?
Will his sin have spread to his theology so that nothing he says can be received without damage to your soul?


The original prohibition is written against the back drop of a polygamous society where having several wives was common place. A widower who had remarried would also be a man of several wives, would he not. A bigamous man should not be leading the Church. But a remarried man is not in Bigamy. Although he may be said to be a serial monogamous person. Horror of horrors. It was such a person albeit imagined that the Sadducees used in a famous question to Jesus.


‘Master, a woman was married to a man who died, so she married his brother, and that repeated itself until she had married all seven brothers. Which one will have her in the resurrection?’
The answer is very illuminating. ‘You know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. In heaven we shall be as the angles, they neither marry nor are given in marriage.’
Note: marriage is not eternal
Note: marriage does not carry over into the resurrection
Note: marriage is for the here and now

A church for the broken

The world in which we live is full of broken people. Unless we meet them with the experience of grace over sin we can never become a haven for them. We may preach that the judgment of God will soon strike down the nations that rage against the Lord and His anointed. But the Lord says that judgment begins at the House of God. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. Our God is a consuming fire, He sits as a refiner of silver and a bleacher of wool with the fullers soap.
Malachi 3

When a divorcee returns to the fold, he is often received the way the Older brother received his prodigal brother. The Father embraces and welcomes, the brother frowns and can’t understand what the fuzz is about.

In every church there are several divorcees, several almost broken marriages, some just about holding to the social habit of suffering in silence in cold and love-less marriages but keeping up appearances is vital. Partly it is our culture and partly it is our pride that keeps us in such deadlocks.

Our bible is the record of sinners forgiven, seven thousands times seven. We relish the psalms of that arch adulterer David, we relish in the king Solomon with a thousand wives, we know our Lord comes from a line of the incestuous, the tempestuous and the outcasts, the socially ousted and the alien in the land. He sat with the prostitutes and the tax-collectors and wine bibbers and made them into his Church.

This is supposedly to be the same Church which today is almost only for the successful in marriage and business, snug and safe in the cocoon of social acceptability. If you have never been brought low, sympathy for the lowest is often missing. Only those eyes light up in real joy and laughter which have been cleared by their own tears of contrition and shame.


Am I going to hell because I have left my wives?
Has God forsaken me because of my failed marriages?
Is grace now not for me because I have sinned against God and fellow man?


‘Father forgive them for my sake.’

Teddy Donobauer Jan 22 2021






























Din text börjar här Nästa stycke = två st Enter
Share:

The unspeakable gift of God, and our "tithing"

”Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable gift!”

On the issue of tithing in the Church of Christ
Teddy Donobauer 2020


One of the recurring themes in almost every Church assembly is the matter of finances. Rare is the Church that does not now and then find that the commitments of the organisation outrun the giving of the members and/or the profit from the various ministries of the church. (A church may be renting out part of it’s building for rental income for instance, or run a bookshop at moderate profit etc)

Almost invariably this shortage of funding is met with a rally from the pulpit focusing on the issue of tithing. And equally invariably the last OT book of Malachi is drawn into the arena. Preaching is then done which challenges the church to stop robbing God. Not bringing the full tithes into the fellowship is such robbery. Secondary issues are: should this tithing be based on gross or net income? Should we tithe before or after tax?

The most powerful punchline is always Mal 3:6
”For I, the LORD do not change: therefore you O sons of Jacob are not consumed”. Unspoken or spoken there is the insinuation that because God Himself does not change then also the Old Testament law of tithing is unchanged and still in place. And all our shortages, missing prosperity and lack of blessing as well as our coming short in collections are a result of our disobedience in the matter of tithing. We are also made to know that there is a deliberate curse in operation. Namely the curse that is best expressed in Deuteronomy 28:1-14.

As compelling and emotionally powerful this preaching can be, and may of course increase the giving to the common good of the fellowship, it falls short of the entire New Covenant teaching. Malachi may be useful for preaching on tithing, but nothing in the New Covenant affords a basis for teaching on tithing.

The use of an Old Testament Law in order to challenge the church of the New Covenant needs to be scrutinized in the light of what the Holy Spirit says in the writings of the New Covenant. And to a certain extent on what is not said. Because unless the difference between the first and the last Covenants are understood the use of
Scripture in support of the Old order must be challenged by the explicit teaching of the New.

Jesus and Tithing
It is startling to note that on this topic the Lord himself had only two comments to make. And both in relation to the last generation of the Mosaic Covenant. After Malachi the so called silent 400 years followed. In that time the Talmud was created and it had an elaborate system of rules regarding tithing and giving. The effects of that modification of the mosaic ruling is seen in two passages from the life and ministry of Jesus.

First: in Matthew 23:23
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law: judgment, mercy, and faith. These ought ye to have done and not to leave the other undone. ”


Note ”Ye pay” aimed at and including all the talmudic followers of tithing laws. Not once does Jesus say to the disciples that they should be like them either in their evasion of the scriptures by reinterpretation or in the matter of tithing.

Second: in Luke 11:42 the same event and meaning as in Matthew 23 is referred to again. But the unique contribution of Luke is from chapter 18:11-13. Jesus relates something obviously not uncommon:
”The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank Thee that I am not as other men are: extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

I fast twice in the week; I give tithes of all that I possess.’

And the publican, standing afar off, would not so much as lift up his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’


Is there a single line from three years of ministry by Jesus either demanding, upholding or verifying the matter of tithing for the Kingdom or the Church? What Jesus did teach about giving is made very clear in the teaching that arose from the trap set by the scribes and pharisees about paying taxes. Jesus demanded to see that which was used to pay the tax. He was shown a coin with the image of the emperor. ”Whose image is that?” He said. ”It is the image of the Emperor”. ”Does that mean that it belongs to the emperor?” ” Then give to the emperor what belongs to him, and give to God what belongs to him.” What bears the image of God? Our (tithing) money or we ourselves?


When you consider that the great comission was to teach everything that Christ had taught to the coming generations then surely
the very omission of tithing ought to raise a red flag before any OT preaching about tithing for a New Testament fellowship is attempted.

Objections will be raised: Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. He said that not one iota or tittle would cease to be law.
Yes that is true. But the application of that is very clearly NOT that the Church was bound to continue fulfilling the mosaic law.
Neither the circumcision, nor the law of the Sabbath nor the ceremonial laws were upheld by the church. The whole of Hebrews deals with the finality of Christ’s fulfillment of the law. In fact Jesus himself upheld the Sabbath law by deliberately breaking it. The laws were not written for themselves but for humanity. Christ himself came to fulfill the law so that it no longer was a curse over sinners.

The Apostles and tithing
What Jesus what silent about, the sum total of the Apostles also kept silent about. There is not a single reference to the concept of tithing in the entire rest of the New testament except in Hebrews 9 where the events of Genesis 14 are referred to and where Abraham gave tithing to Melchizedik King of Righteousness from Salem. Are we to teach that which is written or not?

Let us examine first the issue of
”being under a curse if we do not tithe.” Those who maintain that the non-tithing of the church means that they are still under the curse of the law need to read Galatians chapter 3. They need to show what Romans chapter 8 means. To claim that a born again believer may still be under a curse as severe as that from Deuteronomy 28 and in the very condemnation of it, makes considerable havoc of some weigthy doctrines. What happens to Salvation by faith if you are condemned because of non-tithing? Where is there room for remaining curses after Calvary? Is Isaiah 52-53 a mockery?

Gal 3:9-14 ”So then, those who are of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written: “Cursed is every one who continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.”

But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for “the just shall live by faith.”

And the law is not of faith, but “The man who doeth them shall live in them.”

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us (for it is written, “Cursed is every one who hangeth on a tree”), that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”

To claim that the laws about tithing are to be upheld commits you to keep all of the law. Because breaking one single one of them breaks the whole law. James 2:10 ”For whosoever shall keep the whole law and yet offend on one point, he is guilty of all.”

Ananias and Sapphira Acts ch 5
Early in the life of the Church the issue of finances arose. The belief in the imminent return of Christ occasioned what we may loosely call the ’communalism’ of the Jerusalem church. Many sold all they owned and put the money into the common treasury. It was neither demanded nor as far as we know taught. And it was certainly not because of a teaching on tithing. In fact it was a free will offering which appealed to many. It is obvious that many who remained in Jerusalem after that Pentecost were far from their homes and properties. Among many other dependants the church had Greek widows depending on the church for daily food. (Which caused the beginning of the diaconal ministry Acts 6)

The generous giving by some of the members attracted the attention of the afore mentioned couple. They sold their belonging and came to the church with it. As long as it was theirs they had absolute jurisdiction over it. And there was no coersion to give any of it. None of the Apostles said to the church: ”Well a tenth belongs to God so give that. The rest is up to you.” It was because Ananias and Sapphira made a pretense of giving it all while retaining some for themselves that they were caught out as being liars. And their end was immediate. But not for not tithing.

There are a number of occasions right through the early Church years where gifts of money were made ready for the church in Judea and Jerusalem. Note: only for that Church. The persecution of the Church lead not only to the death of James and the dispersion of most of the Church, it also lead to a continual poverty. The persecutors would have confiscated the treasury at the earliest possibility. Every collection in the NT that is mentioned is for them. But never once on the basis of tithing or out of such funds.

Paul himself travelled and started church after church. But never once did he teach on tithing. Had such tithing existed he could easily have asked for assistance from the churches. He preferred to work day and night so as n
ot to be a burden on any church. He considered that he had the right to share in the material blessings in return for the spiritual blessings he gave out. But never presumed on the institution of tithing for that to be so. Had tithing been enjoined it is impossible to think it was never mentioned.

What did Paul and the others teach on the matter of giving? Precisely what Jesus taught. A life of faith is not a life of ten percent to God. It is a total 100% comittment. A death to the calculating old man. An end to the ’tit for tat’ mentality of ”blessing from God only in proportion to what you give to God”. It is Grace abounding where sin abounds. This is born out so strongly by all his writings. Listen to some of them:
” I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

And be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” Rom 12:1-2

Rom 14:6-12 ”He that regardeth one day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not that day, to the Lord doth he not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not and giveth God thanks.

For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.

For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord. Whether we live therefore or die, we are the Lord’s.

For to this end Christ both died, and arose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.

But why dost thou judge thy brother? Or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

For it is written: “‘As I live,’ saith the Lord, ‘every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God.’”

So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.”

When speaking of the gifts of the church he numbers the gift of giving to the church out of material means as a ”gift of Grace” not an obligation for all. Rom 12:6-13 ”Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us: if prophecy, let us prophesy according to our portion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching;

or he that exhorteth, on exhortation; he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with cheerfulness.

Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.

Have kindly affection one for another with brotherly love, in honor preferring one another;

not slothful in business; fervent in spirit, serving the Lord; rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing instant in prayer; distributing to the necessity of saints, given to hospitality.”


When he comes to the Corinthian Church to collect their contribution to the Church in Jerusalem he brings the matter into focus in a wonderfully succinct way. He came expecting their gift. He found something even more impressing.


2 Cor 8:1-5 ”Moreover, brethren, we want you to know of the grace of God bestowed on the churches of Macedonia: how in a great trial of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality.

For to their power, I bear record, yea, and beyond their power they were willing to give of themselves, praying us with earnest entreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us the fellowship of ministering to the saints. And this they did, not as we had hoped, but first they gave themselves to the Lord and unto us by the will of God,”


There you have the core of NT teaching on giving. Membership in the church or any church is geared to ”taking upon ourselves the fellowship of the ministering to the Saints.” This comes from the concept of ”we are one body” Eph 1:23, 4:4, 4:14-16 and 1 Cor 12:20-27 ”But now there are many members, yet but one body.

And the eye cannot say unto the hand, “I have no need of thee”; nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.”

Nay, much more those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary.

And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.

For our comely parts have no need, but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honor to that part which lacked, that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care one for another.

And whenever one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or when one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.

Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”

Neither Peter, John, Paul, James or any other of those who were filled with the Spirit and wrote what the Spirit gave them ever said one word about tithing. But they spoke volumes about giving ourselves entirely to God, to not considering anything that we have as being our own. We are never owners but stewards of God’s manifold grace. And being a member of the body puts us under obligation to care for one another.

This comes to a head in 2 Corinthians 9 where Paul now tackles this very ministry to the saints by the saints. It is hard to imagine a better opportunity to teach on tithing than this. But not a syllable of that theme is here present.

2 Cor 9:6-15
”Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that always having all sufficiency in everything, you may have an abundance for every good deed; as it is written,

“He scattered abroad, he gave to the poor,
His righteousness endures forever.”

Now He who supplies seed to the sower and bread for food will supply and multiply your seed for sowing and increase the harvest of your righteousness; you will be enriched in everything for all liberality, which through us is producing thanksgiving to God. For the ministry of this service is not only fully supplying the needs of the saints, but is also overflowing through many thanksgivings to God. Because of the proof given by this ministry, they will glorify God for your obedience to your confession of the gospel of Christ and for the liberality of your contribution to them and to all, while they also, by prayer on your behalf, yearn for you because of the surpassing grace of God in you. Thanks be to God for His indescribable gift!

Just a mild exposition of this section will make it plain that giving is not to be under compulsion (You must tithe!!) but out of gratitude to God for all His mercy. Not on the basis of 10% but on the basis of meeting actual needs known. And truly they who give with liberality and out of a generous heart will not be shortchanged by God. He knows what we have need of said Jesus while on earth. But our true needs do not often coincide with our ”I wants.” We do reap what we sow. The essence of the seasoned believer is that of Paul: ” I have learnt to be satisfied both in abundance and in want.” Phil 4:12 ”I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need.

A common objection is this. ”Tithing is at least a way of training people in giving regularly. Is that not a good thing? Saying that everything belongs to God is an easy escape from giving anything at all.” Both statements are true in their own way. The excuse is easy and handy because after all we are also told that ’what happens happens out of sight and no man knows what another man does between himself and God’. And of course it is good to have a regular habit of setting aside on the ord’s day a sum of money to be given. It is when such a habit is elevated to spiritual duty and under the threat of falling away from faith if not carried out that the problem starts.

There are many sins of the flesh connected to our consumption and materialistic world. There are truly many ways in which we can reduce God to equal only our own belly. Indulging the flesh is the downfall of the rich young ruler who would not trade his riches on earth for riches before God in Heaven. The rich man who de cided to build bigger barns ”and live happily ever after” did not realize that the time was up for his soul to be confronted with God. Accountability to God is a red thread through the Scriptures.

Is running a Christian organisation the same as ministering to the Saints?
This then is the ultimate issue. If we read the word of God we find that God always supplies the needs for things that He asks. And here is a clou: ”He gives them to the individuals who then are asked to give back to God what they decide in their hearts to give ’without’ covetousness.”

If we have donned a suit too large for our wallet then the tailor needs to assist us in ”taking in the suit.” When the resources are getting less then it may be time to assess what they are spent on. Any longlived perceived need may be a blind spot.

Being a member of a body means that my contributions are not voluntary. My heart supplies blood to all members equally without discrimination. Constantly, come rain come shine. My hand however has a different mode of giving. In contrast to the heart the hands are idle at times. But however the task of the member is the body needs it, so it is not really a matter of doing my part when I feel like it only. Only if I have given myself to the Head first will I give my body support too with a comitted heart. As a member of a Church I have actually said that I will agree with the work of the church. That means that if the church has say 65 members then the cost of running the entire operation is to be divided by 65. My share is then 1/65th of the annual budget. That is my target for my giving and my praying. Agreeing to expenditure is agreeing to upping my share of the cost. But then of course the reality is that some have more and some less. And all can only give according to what they have and not to what they don’t have. So there will always be need for extraordinary offerings for things not in the budget. That is where prayer and Faith has an extra challenge. If all are to be treated fairly then all will be treated differently.

Stewarding the means is a most carefully undertaken task and is worthy of respect. The handling of money among people of faith in God differs however from that of those whose only hard and reliable facts are their bank balance.

The
Church is never left in doubt by God about the reality that whom He calls He also equips.

Teddy Donobauer.





















Share:

Popular

Recent Posts

Powered by Blogger.