A Message to Clergy

[sojourner]

Does He require us to love our neighbor, to be faithful to our spouse, to keep the Sabbath Day holy, and to be honest with one another? Or did Jesus' fulfillment of "the law" absolve us from keeping these commandments, too? Strictly speaking, God doesn't require anything of us. He gives us our agency. We are free to either obey or disobey His commandments, as we choose. Jesus specifically pointed out to the Pharisees that while the payment of tithes is not as "weighty" a matter as mercy and faith, it is still a law. What exactly would He have needed to say in order for you to believe this law is more than a "healthy spiritual discipline"? In my opinion, the payment of tithes is a simple, straightforward matter of conscience. God gives us virtually everything we have, and asks us to return a mere 10% to Him. Why anyone would feel the need to look for a loophole in this law is beyond me.

Au contraire! God Does require certain things of us as part of the covenant. That's what a covenant is. God requires us to love God and love our neighbor. All else is corollary. What we're confusing here is 1) what is necessary for us to do in order to be in right relationship with God, and 2) what should we do as a response to mercy. The Law is not required of us in order to be in right relationship with God. Jesus took care of that. but the Law may be helpful as a catalyst to our love of God or neighbor. Catalyst, not requirement.
It's not that we're "looking for a loophole" in tithing. One only looks for loopholes in order to circumvent a requirement. If tithing were a requirement, how could it possible be seen as self-sacrifice? How could it be seen as gift? If tithing is "a matter of conscience," then it is not a law. Law is only required to make up for a lack of conscience. I don't look for ways to "get out of" tithing. But I think that requiring the tithe is tantamount to buying one's righteousness -- a "bribe" that helps us "get into" heaven. (Incidentally, that kind of thing was the last straw that motivated Martin Luther to protest the Church).

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Au contraire! God Does require certain things of us as part of the covenant. That's what a covenant is. God requires us to love God and love our neighbor. All else is corollary. What we're confusing here is 1) what is necessary for us to do in order to be in right relationship with God, and 2) what should we do as a response to mercy. The Law is not required of us in order to be in right relationship with God. Jesus took care of that. but the Law may be helpful as a catalyst to our love of God or neighbor. Catalyst, not requirement.
It's not that we're "looking for a loophole" in tithing. One only looks for loopholes in order to circumvent a requirement. If tithing were a requirement, how could it possible be seen as self-sacrifice? How could it be seen as gift? If tithing is "a matter of conscience," then it is not a law. Law is only required to make up for a lack of conscience. I don't look for ways to "get out of" tithing. But I think that requiring the tithe is tantamount to buying one's righteousness -- a "bribe" that helps us "get into" heaven. (Incidentally, that kind of thing was the last straw that motivated Martin Luther to protest the Church).

Not an Abrahamic covanent. Remember, Abraham was asleep or in a trance when God made the covanent with him, and only God signed and sealed it by walking through the cut up animals. Only God has responsibilities in the Abrahamic covanant. Check your theological dictionaries. The distinction between the Abrahamic covanent and the Mosaic and Davidic covanents are very important in Christian theology.

Also see Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith.

 

[sojourner]

Not an Abrahamic covanent. Remember, Abraham was asleep or in a trance when God made the covanent with him, and only God signed and sealed it by walking through the cut up animals. Only God has responsibilities in the Abrahamic covanant. Check your theological dictionaries. The distinction between the Abrahamic covanent and the Mosaic and Davidic covanents are very important in Christian theology.

Also see Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith.

But we're talking about the New Covenant, which is identified by a love relationship.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

But we're talking about the New Covenant, which is identified by a love relationship.

That was my point.

I referred you to Watson because he argues that the New Covanent is patterned after the Abrahamic covanent, which has no stipulations. I think that Watson is with the majority of NT exegetes and theologians.

 

[Booko]

I referred you to Watson because he argues that the New Covanent is patterned after the Abrahamic covanent, which has no stipulations. I think that Watson is with the majority of NT exegetes and theologians.

Just curious, but as regards the Abrahamic covenant, does Watson refer to Jewish sources such as the Talmud at all, or is he going sola scriptura on the Tenach?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Just curious, but as regards the Abrahamic covenant, does Watson refer to Jewish sources such as the Talmud at all, or is he going sola scriptura on the Tenach?

His method is to examine how Paul's theology is a reading/interpretation of the Torah, so Watson examines related rabbinic and other texts that preserve ancient interpretations of the Torah.

 

[sojourner]

That's what I was trying (badly) to say. I think that we're getting hung up on the word "requirement" here. While there are no "requirements" in the N.C. -- that is, righteousness is no longer based upon keeping requirements, there are certain implications for our praxis which are part of the N.C. -- such as self sacrifice for the good of others. Tithing could be lumped into this category.