I'm pretty sure we give about 10%. In full disclosure, though I don't write the checks, pretty sure it's off the net income.
The issue I have with the 10% mantra many espouse is that they, whether they intend to or not, give the impression that it's ok to shirk financial responsibilities, such as paying bills, if necessary in order to "tithe." For example. What if one is on such a tight budget that they literally have nothing left over after paying rent/mortgage, car payment, groceries, utilities, gas for the car, insurance, etc? Are they supposed to skip paying some of these obligations so they can tithe and just hope that God will somehow make sure those bills still get paid? If so, that doesn't particularly sound like responsible behavior.
I believe I heard it decades ago and thought it made sense, still think it does. Can't come up currently with a passage from Scripture so the answer is a personal opinion. And solly for late reply.
Being a good steward covers your giving, and other financial responsibilities. Is God going to want you to give a strict 10%, if doing so means that you can't pay for your car, buy groceries for your kids, heat the house, etc.? I don't think so.
I'm pretty sure those in this conversation all have the same perspective that 10% isn't an absolute number and that responsibilities shouldn't be shirked.
In many ways an advocacy for an unyielding 10% regardless of circumstances, especially if done by a church minister hoping to receive the 10%, is itself irresponsible. If the preacher is telling me that I have to give him 10% and trust that God will make up the shortfall the obvious retort is that I'll pay my bills to make sure I don't end up homeless or having my heating cut off, thanks very much, and he can trust God to make up his own shortfall. It doesn't show a lot of faith to expect your parishioners to hand over what they have while expecting them to have the faith that God will make sure they are OK.
To be clear, I have not heard a hard 10% advocated in decades. In our case, it's giving in the proper sense of the word.
You’re fortunate. Most people in my church believe (ignorantly) that they’re under a minimum 10% tithe. I don’t, but most do. Honestly, I probably should give more often financially than I do, as I know money is needed to run a church, but I’m definitely not convinced that Christians are obligated to adhere to an Old Testament tithing command for Jews. I’m pretty much convinced that pastors decided to pick that number (when trying to figure out how much to get their congregation to give) because, well, it’s “in the Bible.” They also figured it sounded like a “reasonable” amount to ask because, after all, you get to keep the other 90%, right? The problem is, if they are going to expect Christians to follow Old Testament laws meant for the Jews in regards to tithing, there actually were other various “tithing” that the Jews were expected to do. I read somewhere that Jews actually “tithed” about 20% of their income, rather than 10%, when they adhered to all the tithing they were expected to do. Of course, most pastors won’t bother trying to get THAT much from their congregation, as just about NOBODY would be willing to pay that, no matter how much guilt tripping was inflicted on them.
My own personal belief is that what's given to the church is a gift, and it's one to one between God and the giver. Some practice the old testament tithe and that's fine. With the gift, the giving is in the heart of the individual. Now then a sacrifice is a different matter all together.
This has taken on interesting new meanings for me of late. Growing up, idolatry was loosely defined as anything you do too much of, or lead your life with. But it always bothered me 1) because it didn't provide good ways of identifying and 2) was usually used as a cudgel to beat people with. Then I looked at people like professional athletes, or highly focused people. Were their talents idolatrous because they were so consuming? Couldn't be. Fast forward to today, and I think politics (especially on the left) is idolatrous to most. Its idolatrous in that it's a substitute for worship, grace, and sovereignty. Commandment 1: You shall have no other God's before me. But you see people who are so convinced their party is morally correct in every way that they'll support ANY talking point so long as their party's label appears on it. Consistency be danged, it is obeyed *as if it is breathed by God*. Their refusal to listen, and passion to mischaracterize people comes from phony grace: "only my party can save you from your foul nature". Idolatry is more than time + passion. Its where you place your trust for sovereignty and salvation.
Yes. But true on both sides does not necessitate equally true on both sides. Water and arsenic can both be poisonous. The quantity of each is important to understand.
Any of you even been to a church where that pastor was supreme? In other words Lording over the church and it being perfectly okey dokey with the congregation? Almost, if not, completely pastor worship. 1Pt:5:3: Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. Wouldn't that be idolatry?
Not quite that bad. But I’ve been places where the lean is more heavily in that direction than pastors or people would like to believe.