Tithing

My younger brother, Dana, is like many people, I guess, a tad skeptical about the subject of money when it comes to the context of church. In this past Thursday, he sent me a rather amusing story about a man named Maldun. Maldun turns out, lived alone with his dog. And after some time, his dog passed away and Maldun decided to go to the very attractive local church. It's stunning, high spire that was so appealing to him and to speak to the minister. And he went up to the gentleman and said, Pastor, would you please say a prayer for my dog that just died? The pastor responded that, well, frankly, we don't do that kind of thing. In this church, we don't have services for animals. But there's a new church down the street belonging to a different denomination. There's no telling what they believe. Why don't you go down and perhaps they can help you out and do a service for the creature? Maldun responded with enthusiasm, thank you, Pastor. And I'll go immediately as you suggest. Oh, by the way, do you think that a donation of $50,000 would be enough for a service like that? The pastor responded, glory be to God! Why didn't you tell me that the dog was a congregationalist? I suppose most of us have a tinge of cynicism when it comes to the subject of tithing or tithing or giving or stewardship, wondering whether the subject isn't a bit too self-serving for the local church. It's certainly the case that many pastors feel awkward on this topic. I was impressed by a study done a few years ago written up in Leadership Magazine where they found out that pastors across America in terms of this survey, anyway, about 75% of them do make a personal habit of tithing. And yet, much to the surprise of those doing the survey that these pastors were not preaching what they were practicing. For the one half of them apparently resisted the opportunities to preach on the subject of tithing or stewardship. And they did this because they felt it was so potentially off-putting and in spite of the prominence that this topic has in the teaching of our Lord Jesus. Some have said that Jesus taught more on stewardship than he did on any other single topic. I'm not sure if that's the case, but there's certainly plenty of teaching from the lips of our Savior about our relationship to money. Well, I have to acknowledge that I think some of this shyness on the topic is the result of an allergic reaction to abuses with respect to teaching on tithing. There have been a number of high-profile ministers in the electronic church who seem to mention giving every single time they're on the air and have built themselves a significant financial empire by pushing the subject the way they do. Very frequently, this is playing into a doctrine that is sometimes dubbed the health and wealth gospel. Believers are led to imagine that God has made a promise that is a little bit like an investment scheme. If you give 10% of your income to the Lord, and that gets translated 10% to this radio ministry or to our new building program or whatever, then God is going to bless you with such profusion that you're going to have to open up new bank accounts to handle the influx of income that is coming your way. One poor brother in Dade County, Florida, apparently took the words of his minister quite literally on this subject, and though he was unable at that point to pay his bills and was in very desperate financial straits, he decided to start tithing. And inevitably, the result of this practice on top of his financial situation that was not well thought out was only to accelerate his financial ruin. Now, at the advice of his lawyer, he's decided to sue the church for misrepresentation of the promises of God. I don't know whether I advise that as a response, it seems a bit vindictive, but nevertheless, I think we do need to begin with an important disclaimer. In spite of the Bible's lavish promise of blessing for all who would follow in God's commands, the richness of the Lord's blessing on our lives, there is not a promise somewhere buried in Scripture that I've not been able to find anyway. I don't think you will find it either, where God promises that you are going to financially improve your circumstances if you start tithing. In fact, if we look at the example of Jesus, this should be enough to disobey any of us of that notion. No human being on the surface of the earth has ever been more faithful with respect to God's commands and with respect to his injunction concerning tithing. Jesus must have tithed perfectly, and yet the result in our Savior's life was not only an inability to keep up with the Joneses, he didn't even keep up with the foxes and the birds. The Bible tells us Jesus replied, foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head. So if we follow the example of the Savior, you can see that material prosperity is not necessarily a promise that God is making in response to our faithfulness. Paul warns against the false teachers, men of corrupt mind in 1 Timothy, chapter 6, who have robbed, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that Godliness is a means of financial gain. It is not. It is not. How about then, then the law of tithing? This morning, we're going to depart from our usual practice which has been to try to give attention to the context of our passage and walk through it more or less to focus just on this one aspect. Eventually, we'll return to Genesis 15 and consider the other rich lessons that are here for us, but where tithing has been a cause of so much confusion, and if you listen carefully, you'll notice at least I'm going to suggest that we ought to take exception to many of the common assumptions about tithing, it seemed to be important to focus on that topic this morning. Is, first of all, the law of tithing still applicable for Christians? There are six passages in the Old Testament that explicitly command tithing. We find them in Leviticus chapter 27, Numbers chapter 18, Deuteronomy 12, Deuteronomy 14, Deuteronomy 26, and finally in the Old Testament at the end of it in Malachi chapter 3. It's that last passage that you perhaps have heard, if you've heard anything on this topic, and let me read it for you. It's Malachi chapter 3 beginning with verse 8. Will a man rob God, yet you are robbing me, but you ask, how do we rob you in tithes and offerings? You are under a curse, the Lord says. The whole nation of you, because you are robbing me, bring the whole tithe into the storehouse that there may be food in my house. Test me in this, says the Lord of hosts, and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour down so much blessing that you will have no more need. I want to draw attention to that translation, because those in the health and wealth gospel have preferred another rendering, which runs something like until there's not room enough for it. That's where they get the idea that you've got to start opening other bank accounts. God, a more careful attention to the text, God is not promising that he's going to meet all of our greeds. He's only promising to meet our needs that will be no more need, and then all the nations will call you blessed, for yours will be a delightful answer, as the Lord Almighty. Here will then be the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant in your experience. Now, in fact, I'm aware, and you are perhaps aware, that there are many wonderful Bible-believing Christians who insist that tithing is no longer required, and that even to suggest that it's required is a kind of legalism where we're taking the Old Testament law and not giving sufficient account of the changes that take place as you go from the Old Testament to the new. Those Christians who argue against tithing will point out correctly that there are no explicit mentions of tithing after Pentecost. In other words, none of the letters of the Apostle Paul, for example, or John, exhort Christians to tithe, and the assumption is that absence of explicit mention then means that probably this law has now been nullified. Of course, everyone agrees that we all ought to be generous. The Bible teaches that from Genesis to Revelation, no one disputes that point. The Bible also teaches, and all are in agreement, that our giving should be regular and also a normal feature of our worship together. In other words, here at Park Street Church, and probably in every church you've ever been in, it is not our practice to encourage a payroll deduction plan for taking care of your obligations to be generous. We don't encourage or solicit contributions by mail as a practice. That's not really what we're interested in. We don't apologize for the fact that the offering is placed smack dab really at the climax of our worship service. That's intentional. If you look at the order of our service, there's a logic to it. It starts, of course, calling our attention to the Lord and invoking His presence. Then we hear the word of the Lord first read and then preached. Then the whole restless service, as a kind of a climax, is a response to that. Most of our singing comes after the preaching, so that we're singing to the God whose reality we've just been reminded of, and whose redemption has just freshly been impressed upon us. Then we lead our time of prayer and try to echo that teaching. Then again, in climactic fashion, we have an opportunity in a tangible way to express our love for God by offerings and tithes. In effect, we're modeling ourselves on the worship that's found often in the Bible. Just as one example might be the worship of the sinful woman who came to Jesus at the house of Simon the Pharisee and a response to what Christ had done for her. You remember, brings that alabaster flask of perfume and breaks it over Jesus' feet, pouring out her substance on the Savior, worshipping Him in a tangible way, responding to His forgiveness and mercy. The Apostle Paul states this as a principle in 1 Corinthians 16. That's why no one's disagreeing about it in spite of differences about the applicability of tithing. In 1 Corinthians 16, it says, on the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money and keeping with his income, saving it up so that when I come, no collections will have to be made. On the first day of every week, why does Paul say that? Why doesn't he just say when you get around to it? Or why not the third day of the week? Or whatever day of the week's convenient for you? Well, he insists it's on the first day of the week because, of course, the first day of the week is the Christian Sabbath. This was the Lord's day. This was the day that the early church were now making a practice of meeting together, reminding themselves of Christ's death and resurrection because he rose again on the first day of the week. He himself set this as a pattern as he appeared to the disciples on the first day of the week on several occasions between his resurrection and his ascension. And so, following in parallel to the experience of the Jews in Jesus' day and their worship at the synagogue, God's people, the Christians now, on the Lord's day, were then making a practice of worshiping God with their contributions even as Paul exhorted them. This is applicable. It seems to me to the tith, although tithing is not mentioned here because, as we'll see in a moment, tithing was the Old Testament means especially for taking care of the poor. And if you know about the background of this contribution that Paul is mentioning in 1 Corinthians 16, it is a contribution, a mission's contribution as it were for relief of the poor saints in Jerusalem. For taking care of the needs of some Christians hundreds of miles away from the church at Corinth whom they've never met. This generous giving of one body of Christ to others in a far corner of the world, and so it is comparable in terms of the purpose and I think then applicable. All agree that we ought to be generous, all agree that we ought to have giving the enormous feature of our worship, and all agree that our giving should be proportionate to our income. This is a general principle that Jesus taught, and he tells us to whom much is given, much is required. Paul and 1 Corinthians 16 makes it more explicit. Again, referring to that gift, he says on the first day of the week, each of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income. Proportionate to his income, are you giving proportionately to your income, saving it up so that when I come, no collections will have to be made. In fact, the disagreement is not that there should be proportionate giving. The disagreement among Christians is what the proportion, the standard proportion should be. Because although it is clear in the Old Testament, God arranged for his people to give in terms of tithe, starting with our text in Genesis 14, it's argued that Jesus has done so much more for us. For so much more indebted than the saints would have been in the Old Testament, that we ought to give more than just 10%. No one understands, no one is arguing. Whoever is arguing against tithing, no one to my knowledge, is arguing that we should give less than 10%. The argument usually is no, we ought to give a lot more. In fact, the example is given by the Apostle Paul that our literal giving of money ought to be in some sense a reflection of what God has given to us when he gave us Jesus Christ. In 2 Corinthians chapter 8, he says to the church there, just as you excel in everything, in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in complete earnestness, and in your love for us, see to it that you also excel in this grace of giving. Work at learning how to give. And how can you do that? Well, for you know that grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor. So that you through his poverty might become rich. Here then is the standard of giving that Paul was setting up before the Christians at Corinth. Think about how Jesus was rich and then became poor for you, that you would now know your debt of gratitude and how much you owe him, indeed you owe him everything, and so you give him everything that belongs to him. In fact, a lot of times these Christians who argue against tithing, and I think correctly point out many of these texts, correctly point out how Jesus on occasion exorted his followers to literally give everything. In the same way, in Luke chapter 14, Jesus turned to his disciples saying any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple. You may know the story, how Jesus confronted the rich young ruler who is making an idol of his money. And Jesus said to him, out of love, Jesus looked at him and loved him. One thing you lack, he said, go sell everything you have and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven, then come follow me. Based on these texts and those who disagree with tithing will then argue that, well, if we are going to give proportionately, and if we are going to be more generous than they might have needed to be in the Old Testament, then are giving our tithing ought to be graduated. And some of you may have read Ron Ciders' argument for this, his book Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger that has been widely read by believers, argues for a graduated tithe. He urges Christians to consider starting with what would be the government postulated level of poverty. I think right now that is about, well, for a family of four, it would be $16,530. And so at $16,000 annual income, at that point you would start tithing. And then cider urges, and apparently this is his own example, with every $1,000 you earn above that, you would increase your giving by 5%. Now he says, of course, arbitrary, but to try to make the point and to make it still be proportionate. So the next $1,000, it would be 15%, and then the next $1,000 you would give of that $1,000, 20%, and so on up the line. After $18,000, of course, then you are giving everything you make extra over and above whatever comes in. Well, I think that's admirable. I certainly am not going to say that we are limited to giving tithes, and the Old Testament, they weren't either. They had free will offerings in order to have opportunity to give even more when they felt so richly blessed. But I think we ought to be reluctant to deviate from what the Scriptures have set out as a pattern. Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount stipulates that the assumption ought to be continuity rather than discontinuity. There are a lot of things that are mentioned in the Old Testament that aren't repeated again. The Old Testament cannibalism is condemned. Now that's not mentioned again after Pentecost. Does that mean it's okay to cannibalize? Or we could just go in a long list of things that are condemned or things positively that are enjoined in the Old Testament. You're required to put parapets around your root. That's not repeated again after Pentecost. Does that mean that we can now disregard the safety of others? Don't worry about building in safety belts and cards that you manufacture or whatever. I think Jesus' point is, no, you should assume continuity, unless there's some explicit reason for assuming discontinuity that all of God's commands still hold, unless they've been set aside by having been fulfilled in the death of Christ. For example, the sacrificial law we understand has now been fulfilled in his death on the cross. However, he said, do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. You see, it's continuity that's being affirmed, not discontinuity. Well, you say, well, wait a minute. Remember Jesus told the rich young ruler, go sell everything. Doesn't that show that we owe more than other ties? And I say, you've misunderstood, in the Old Testament, the same thing was true. On occasion, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, a prophet would come to someone and tell them they got to give up everything. Our situation hasn't changed. We all owe God everything. It's always been that way, and it'll be that way to the end of time. So Elijah comes to the widow at Zarathath during a time of national drought, coming to the most marginalized, liminal member of the society who is utterly destitute. And what does he say to this widow of Zarathath? He says to her, give me some drink and some food. She then responds and says, sir, after giving him some drink, I can't give any food. All we've got is this little bit of flour, which I'm now going to mix with oil and make a cake. And I'm going to give it to my son, and after he and I eat this last meal, we're then going to die. And Elijah has the gall to say, give it to me. You see, we owe him everything. And in response to the destitution, then, in response to her obedience, Elijah goes on, under the inspiration, the Spirit says, the jar of flour will not be used up, and the jug of oil will not run dry until the day the Lord gives rain on the land. In other words, if you obey in this respect, God will take well. He doesn't promise her that she's going to be the richest woman in this side of the Euphrates. He's only promising that God will take care of her needs, not her grids, and indeed God does it and does so, bless her. David, when he offered the offering that allowed the temple to be built and others with him, says, wealth and honor come from you. Can you say anything other than that? You are the ruler of all things, Lord. In your hands are strength and power to absolve and give strength to all. Who am I? Who are my people that we should be able to give as generously as this? Everything comes from you, and we have given you only what comes from your hand. He says, oh, Lord, our God, for all the subundance we have provided for the building of a temple, for your holy name, it comes from your hand, and all of it belongs to you, 1 Chronicles 29. All of it belongs to you, only giving back to God what belongs to you, and that's always been true. So then what's the point of the time? Well, the point then is the same point now. And the point is that God, in his glorious and gracious condescension, recognizing that his people would if they could give him everything, that his people understand that they owe him everything, has given us a means to represent the giving of everything without, if we should follow it, without putting in jeopardy our own well-being or that of our families. God is an interested in povrishing you. Even the rich young ruler, when he gave everything, Jesus didn't say, now join an order of mendicants, take a bow of poverty, you're not allowed to earn another dime the rest of your life. Jesus doesn't say that. Another occasion, he allows Zacchaeus just to give half, that's perfectly fine too. The point is, the tide was a symbolic representation of it all, and it actually comes from a widespread practice that we read about in the Bible in 1 Samuel 8. When there was a king in the land, the standard tribute that the king could impose on his subjects was 10%. Israel, in terms of this text, in the Pentateuch, had no king other than God. There were no kings then. There was just God who was king. And so to make the point that he's the one to whom I owe everything, he's the Lord of my life, the king of kings, we give him the 10% representative of it all. Who is the Lord of your life, to whom are you paying your tribute? The tide that's applicable still, because that symbolism is still applicable. It's also applicable, I think, because here it is in Genesis 14 before there was a theocracy. It's true, many of the laws concerning the theocracy have passed away. There are a number of laws, for example, requiring you to go up to Jerusalem three times a year that were imposed on the people of God. And it was even promised, if you do that, while you go up, God will guard the border, so if you're a soldier, don't worry, no one will covet the land. There's a supernatural promise, you can leave, you can leave your guns, and you can leave the barracks, you've got to come to Jerusalem, God will take care of the land, and the enemy will not attack three times a year. There are many such promises, many such obligations that are attached to the theocracy, to the experience of Israel that began at Sinai. But here in Genesis 14, you've got to understand, we're before Sinai. This is not under the theocracy, this should predispose us to assume that it is still an ongoing obligation. I think it's important, the Lord doesn't explicitly tell Abraham to do this, this just wells up within him. Melchizedek has just reminded him that God gave you this victory. Indeed, the Lord is the only one who could explain the victory when Abraham went against these mighty tyrants that had come and devastated the land. It was God who gave him the victory, so the spoils all belong to the Lord. And so Abraham, to give vents to that desire, to give honor to God, so it would be clear that no one has made him wealthy, it all comes from the Lord, gives a tie to the representative in the person of Melchizedek. Later on in Genesis 28, Jacob likewise gives a tie before the theocracy. In Genesis 28, Jacob made a vow, if God will be with me and will watch over me on the journey I'm taking and provide food to eat and close to where so that I can return safely to my father's house, then the Lord will be my God, and this stone will be a witness in a place for God's house. And all that you give me, I will give you a temp. Again, welling up spontaneously from within this grateful heart is this pledge. And then our Lord Jesus on the other side of the Bible, our Lord Jesus seems to explicitly affirm tithing in his teaching in Matthew chapter 23 on one occasion, again in Luke 11. But in Matthew 23 he says, woe to you, teachers of the law in Pharisees, you hypocrites, you give a tenth of your spices, mint, dill, and common, but you have neglected the more important matters of the law, justice, mercy, and faithfulness. We understand that there's a difference here. Tithing is purely symbolic. The ethics of symbolism are different from the ethics of moral imperatives. It's like the ethics of the Lord's suffer. How much bread does it have to be in order to be the Lord's suffer? Is that okay or does it have to be more? It's all symbolism. The question is what's the adequate symbolism to express the reality that God is king of my life? It's the ethics of symbolism. There is a difference between tithing, injustice, mercy, and faithfulness. Nevertheless, Jesus goes on to say, you should have practiced the latter, namely justice, mercy, and faithfulness, without neglecting the former, namely tithing. Jesus could have said, you should have practiced the latter and will let the herbs take care of themselves if he wanted to be dismissive of tithing. When Jesus spoke about cleaning and unclean, he made it clear that that distinction was soon to pass away. Here there's no hint that in just a few days he will be crucified and rise again and this law will pass away. Nothing that Jesus mentions here is something that's temporary and about to be extinguished or nullified. So I think the presumption ought to be on part of God's people that yes, tithing is still an adequate, amorous way of expressing our gratitude and we ought not be pressured into thinking that you've got to give more. Secondly, what about computation of tithing? These things will go more quickly. You've heard a lot about fuzzy math lately. You may think that mine's fuzzy math. I admit that my view of how to computer tithe differs from what we've often been taught but I still believe that it's the case and encourage you to search the scriptures and see if it's so. The first point would be that the tithe, or just a fancy word for 10%, the 10% of that which we are giving is 10% not of our principle but of our increase, not of our savings but of our earnings. It's perfectly fine to give from your savings. Barnabas sold a field and took the proceeds and laid it at the Apostle's feet. If you want to, that's wonderful. I know there's one brother here who's done that. Emptyed out all his bank accounts and his assets and gave it to the Lord for the work of the Lord. It's an amazing example and all those who know it were just thrilled and convicted about it. But I don't think that's what's required with respect to tithing. A tithing is based on explicitly the increase your earned income. Be sure to set aside a tenth of all the increase of your seed that your fields produce each year due to our army 1422. Secondly, your tithe is not a faith pledge. I know in some churches there's been a lot of talk about faith pledges where you are supposed to, at least as I understand it, kind of gas or believe God to give you a certain amount of money and then you promise you're going to give God for his work or for missions that amount of money even though you haven't earned it and have no sure way of earning it. The Old Testament is very clear. There is a gift you can give up front. It's called first fruits. In first fruits, well, the analogy would be if you had a whole wheat field of harvest about the come, you grab one sheath and give it to the Lord as a first fruit. It's just a trivial amount. And if you want to pledge a first fruit gift, that's fine. Just a trivial amount. Maybe a dime or a quarter or something like that. That's the first fruits. You're about to launch a new dot com. You're going to put $1 in the plate as a first fruits offering to remind yourself symbolically that whatever comes of this, you're giving to the Lord or something. But don't think that's tithing. Tithing is based at the end of the year based on your realized gain, what you actually earn, not what you are presuming or hoping to earn. Thirdly, it's not based on gifts. And I mention this because I know we have many students in this congregation. If your father gives you $10,000 for your tuition, do not put 1,000 of that in the plate. We're not supposed to give to the Lord that which costs us nothing. As David says in 2 Samuel 24, don't tie based on gifts. You don't even tie, in my opinion, based on inheritance. Again, welcome to do free will offerings and to do the kind of thing that Barnabas did with a field that he didn't need. But that's not what a tie is. It's based on the sweat of your brow, not your parents brow. It's an expression about what your time and life means before God. Don't wreck the symbolism by confusing what is actually a significant instruction in the Old Testament. Furthermore, it seems to me, and this may be the most controversial bit, a tie is ought to be based on your after-tax income. How do you like that? I know a number of hearts leaping within them. You didn't think you were tithing up till now and all of a sudden, that Don's on you, you've been giving free will offerings in addition to ties. Well, that's fine. And I know I'm shooting myself in the foot and I'll hear it from the trustees right afterward. But I do believe, if you look in the Old Testament, the law of tie, the course was before there was a king, before there were taxes. And so we have to understand we are making a certain assumption here in France. But the tie is explicitly based on the increase of the grain or your herd or whatever. That is, that which is disposable to you. When you bring in the harvest, now all that which you have, you're at liberty to spend on your shelter, on your food, on your clothing or on your luxuries. It's that portion of your income, all of that which comes in and is part of your disposable income, that's the basis on which the tie is computed. Not what the fields produce but the poor ate. In the Old Testament, when you had a field, you were supposed to not harvest the corners and you're not supposed to glean your own field. You leave that for the poor. Before there was a government, this was the way of redistributing wealth for the sake of the poor. Now we use taxes, income taxes for that purpose. Well, you don't give a tie based on your estimate of how many apples are out there that you didn't harvest but maybe the poor ate. That's up to them to face their tie on. So, if the rats eat it, the amulet kites, the marauders take it, the storms destroy it, you don't include it in your competition. And I don't mean to imply the government, there are a bunch of rats but the point is it's not your disposable income. As an anecdote, Jesus, you remember, was challenged about the two Drakma tax and Matthew 17 and after agreeing to pay it, he instructed his disciple to go to a fish. The first one they caught, opened its mouth and you'll find a four Drakma coin, take it and give it to them for my tax and for yours. But you'll notice it's a four Drakma coin, not a four Drakma coin and then 40 leptons to pay for the tie on the 40 Drakmas. You see if it's all going to tax, there's no tie because that's not yours, that's somebody else's. Anyway, we could go on, I think, how about the use of the tax, the use of the tie, rather. Not only is the computation a little different, perhaps, than you've heard, the use is different, none of it in the Old Testament, none of it was used for buildings. All of the tie is used for ministry for people. What it goes for buildings is the extra gifts, the free will offerings, a booty from the enemy and that kind of thing. But the Old Testament laws very clear, the tie is for ministry, for people, up to a third of it for the poor. And so, don't be upset that many of our missionaries are actually engaged in works of Christian charity and a development and relief for medical service and so on. That's excellent use for your tie. I hear at Park Street Church we've sometimes given people a misimpression by our envelopes, they've changed now. But originally it used to say tides and offerings, that was the first line, the second line was missions. As if you couldn't use your tie for missions. In my judgment, missions is an excellent use of tides, that's what the Levites were missionaries. They were evangelists and teachers who roamed the land and spread the gospel and they were a proper recipient for the tie than the Old Testament. Why would it be any different now? Our missionaries, our ministries, any Christian, any work in the name of Christ is a worthy recipient for your tides. It doesn't all have to come to the local church either in my judgment. If you have a heart of burden for some other excellent ministry, use that as a vehicle for some of your tides. That's entirely appropriate. That's not to say we don't need your generosity here or that it's not appropriate by the way I hesitate to mention this. First Corinthians, chapter 9, Paul argues in the same way the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel, don't muzzle the ox while it's treading out the grain. There's nothing wrong with supporting a local ministry. I'm just saying the local ministries don't have some kind of monopoly on our tides. That's just not the case in scripture. Finally, what's the last constraints on our gifts are tithing. The most important thing it seems to me is that our giving should be from the heart. Freely offered, the tides in the Old Testament are listed under the free will offerings in Leviticus 27. Our text here shows Abraham out of a heart filled with gratitude, freely giving up his tides. Tides should never be coerced. In the Old Testament, yes, there's something God wanted for his people, but they were never sanctioned. They were never penalized by criminal penalties or something if you failed to tie. They weren't coerced. They were from the heart of God's people. It must be that way. And so we don't have heavy handed techniques for every member canvass. We don't want to shame and humiliate people into having to give if they don't want to give. That's fine. No one even knows what you're giving in this church. That's exactly the way it should be. Just the treasure. That's it. It's entirely confidential and it's that way in most churches to my knowledge. Because we want the giving to be out of a glad and generous heart. Paul says each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion. For God loves a cheerful giver. Let's give cheerfully and gladly to the one who is worthy of receiving it all. Worthy is the lamb who was slain to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise. Let us pray. Our Father in heaven, we ask that everything we might give to you might be given with glad and generous hearts. When we give to you of our time, when we give to you of our energies, when we give to you of our substance. Yes, Lord, even when we give our very lives, may we delight to do so. May we rejoice at these opportunities to show you our affection in our gratitude to you, the one who has given us everything in Christ's name. Amen.