Tithing teaches we're not indepedent from God
 |
| English: Abraham embraces his son Isaac after receiving him back from God (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
ENVY
The Philistines did not steal Isaac’s wells; they ruined them. The stopped-up wells did not make them richer; they made Isaac poorer. What was the Philistines’ motivation? The text is clear: envy.
The Philistines wanted to see Isaac worse off. They resented the fact of his wealth. They resented the God who had made him wealthy. They could not attack this God, and they chose not to attack God’s man. They did the next best thing: they attacked the property of the man whom God had rewarded.
If Isaac had been richer, he would have had more surplus wealth. This would have enabled him to trade more with the Philistines. This would have increased their wealth. The best economic definition of wealth is this: an increase in one’s opportunities or choices. But the Philistines did not want greater wealth if it meant that Isaac would have more wealth. They were like the peasant in the Russian proverb who was offered one wish by a genie. “You may have anything your heart desires,” said the genie, “but your neighbor will receive twice as much as you do.” The peasant thought a while, and replied, “Make me blind in one eye.”
Socialism was once proclaimed as a way to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor. Almost everyone knows today that socialism makes most people poorer. Yet socialistic legislation still appeals to millions of voters all over the world. They would rather see most people poorer under socialism than see most people wealthier under capitalism. They resent the rich far more than they resent poverty. They resent the idea that some people have more wells or better wells than others. So, like that Russian peasant, they legislate their envious wish. Blind in one eye, they rejoice in the even worse condition of their neighbor. Now everyone staggers. Stewardship is thwarted.
GREED
God blessed them, and said to them, “Be fruitful, and increase in number; fill the earth, and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground (Genesis 1:28).
For we brought nothing into the world, and we can take nothing out of it. But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs (1 Timothy 6:7–10).
Something seems wrong here. We are commanded to be fruitful and multiply, yet we are also told that we should be content with a little food and clothing. The person who seeks wealth will fall into a snare. The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.
This raises an obvious question: How can Christians extend their area of dominion in history and also remain poor? We could give away all our wealth in one fell swoop, of course, but then with what can we subsequently multiply our resources? If we sell our capital base and give the money to the poor, what do we use as the means to increase our productivity for the next round of dedicated giving? If we sell all that we have to the humanists and occultists, this leaves them as the capitalists and us as employees. We become hewers of wood and drawers of water. Is this God’s desire for stewardship?
Let us get this problem into ecclesiastical perspective. If you are a pastor, would you be pleased to learn that the tithing multimillionaire who transferred into your church a week ago gave away everything he owned two weeks ago? He decided to adopt a simpler lifestyle, so he gave away all his money. He is now a salaried worker at McDonald’s, but he assures you that he still intends to tithe.
Does this sound a bit nutty? Of course it does. But why is it a wrong approach, biblically speaking, in all but the rarest cases, such as the rich ruler who was obsessed with wealth?
The fundamental issue is the motivation of the capital owner. He has been given control over great wealth because he has met the needs of consumers. He has produced goods or services more efficiently—less wastefully—than his competitors have. He has served the consumer well. He has made a profit. He was able to accumulate wealth because he invested wisely. This enabled him to give an ever-growing tithe. This was a real benefit to the kingdom of God, both for the church and for the community, which had a better selection of goods.
Then what was Paul so concerned about in his letter to Timothy? Why such fear of money? Because of what money is: the most marketable commodity. It is the universal consumer good. It provides universal access. You can buy anything with it. It represents goods and services in general. This includes that most seductive of all goods, power.
The issue is not money. The issue is man’s presumption of autonomy. “The wealth of the rich is their fortified city; they imagine it an unscalable wall” (Proverbs 18:11). Rich men trust in money as completely as ancient kings trusted in chariots. The obsessed person is the person who has substituted anything in history for the God of the Bible. He has built himself an idol, either an idol of nature or an idol of history.
The love of money is the threat because money is the universal economic commodity, the ultimate idol of history. Money not only symbolizes everything else, it can purchase almost everything else. The greedy person believes that “every man has his price.” He does not understand Christ’s warning: “What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Matthew 16:26). God has His price. That price is so high that only Jesus Christ could pay it. The prime asset, salvation, is transferred free of charge in history to those whom He chose in His grace before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4–5). It cannot be bought by nonautonomous man.
Still, we owe God full payment. We are His servants. He is gracious to take only ten percent of whatever we produce as His leasehold payment.
The tithe is God’s means of keeping us from the illusion of autonomy. This is man’s inoculation against the lust for more. The person who pays his tithe is far less likely to fall into the snare of either the autonomy of wealth (too rich to fail) or the autonomy of “the simpler life,” meaning a life with far less personal responsibility (too poor to fail). The quest for more money is as legitimate as the pastor’s quest for more church members, and just as fraught with danger for the person who sees some technique as the substitute for God’s grace.
Greed is not exclusive to the rich, nor is envy to the poor. Both stem from a failure to remember that God owns all things, and we are mere stewards of His gifts.
