 GOD'S TWIN LAWS by John G. Alber was published in multiple versions from approximately 1916 to 1959 (7th edition). [The following is the text of the book. No known copyright, no record of copyright renewal. Page numbers and misspellings left as in the original. Unfortunately or strangely this 18 page pamphlet is currently be sold on Amazon for $569 used and $768 in "new" condition. Link to Amazon book here.You can just read it for free below. Scan of original book can be found at archive.org here.  GOD'S TWIN LAWS by John G. Alber ETERNAL - IMMUTABLE - UNCHANGEABLE 1/7 of man's time, 1/10 of man's income IS GOD'S BOTH as old as the race. BOTH for man's benefit. BOTH reaffirmed, (not enacted) in the Mosaic Law. BOTH endorsed by Jesus. endorsed by the Apostles. BOTH taught and observed for centuries in the Christian Church. Pamphlet No. 17 FOREWORD The following is a brief epitome, greatly condensed, of a series of sermons on Stewardship and Tithing. The aim is to show the place in the tithe in the thought of God as revealed in His Word and in human history. The tithe is upheld as one of the ancient, divine principles of the race, and like the institution of prayer is applicable to all dispensations, patriarchal, Jewish and Christian. The tithing idea runs through all the annals of mankind, and like a silver stream with its sources in the Garden of Eden, touches all lands in all ages. The studies that constitutes this series were prepared with the common people in mind and with no thought of publication. They were published because it was felt by some that they might be helpful to others. They are not presented as sermonic models. No claim is made for originality. The materials were gathered from many sources and for lack of space credit could not always be given. If as a result of this series the Truth of God shall be. lodged in any human heart we shall be more than paid for our effort. John G. Alber Omaha, Nebr., Nov. 17th, 1916. ANOTHER FOREWORD. For many years I have felt the need of just such a compilation of brief, lucid scriptural arguments in favor of tithing as is admirably set forth in the following pages. While adapted to all classes of readers, this presentation will be of special value to ministers in search of material for sermons on tithing. LAYMAN. Page 2 GOD'S TWIN LAWS - I. 1. God's laws are in force everywhere. There is nothing that we can. name or think of that is not under the control of law. The muscles of my arm contract under the jurisdiction of law. God's laws are everywhere in His universe. Lift your thoughts toward the heavens and you will be awed into reverent silence by that spectacle of countless worlds which yield ceaseless obedience to God's laws. They are impelled on ward by the law of centrifical [sic] force and held in their orbits by the law of centripital [sic] force. They move with inconceivable velocity, never varying in their appointed paths, always on time and never in collision. This sublimely beautiful spectacle was used by Blackstone to illustrate God's authority in human affairs. "For as God when He created. matter and indued it with the principle of mobility, established certain rules for the perpetual direction of that motion; so when He created man and indued him with free will to conduct himself in all parts of life, He laid down certain immutable laws whereby that free will is in some degree regulated and restrained. These are the eternal immutable laws of good and evil." 2. They came into existence with the things to which they apply. With the ushering in of the planets came the law of gravitation. With the creation of man came certain laws that apply to him. The laws of which I shall speak today will be traced back to creation. 3. Not to understand God's laws makes no difference in their working. The laws of electricty [sic] were the same when the Pharaohs were building the pyramids as they are today. 4. God's laws may be discovered by man. They are not made or annulled by him. A legislator is no more a lawmaker than an astronomer is a planet maker. 5. Knowledge of God's laws may be lost and rediscovered. Illustrations of this fact may be found in the laws for making cement and glazing pottery. The law for tempering brass is one that has been lost and never rediscovered. 6. God's laws are supreme, eternal, immutable, unchangeable. A boy learned in his arithmatic [sic] that 2+3=5. He expressed his admiration for the author who could make things true by putting them in a book. "My dear boy," said his teacher, "the man who made the arithmetic did not make that true. It was true before an arithmetic was written. He put it there because it was true. The laws of which I speak today we call "twin" laws because they are so much alike. One-seventh of man's time and one-tenth of his income belongs to God in a special sense. Both of these laws are as old as the race; both are for man's benefit; both reaffirmed (not enacted) in the Mosaic Law; both endorsed and sanctioned by Jesus and his apostles; both were observed for centuries in the Christian church. Page 3 I know of no body of Christian people who do not respect and teach the first of these laws. There may be a dispute as to which day to keep, but there is no dispute that we should keep one day. As to the second there are thousands who consider it as binding as the first. Other thousands do not as yet so understand it. It is my purpose to show that these laws are twins, that one is as binding as the other. I. BOTH ARE AS OLD AS THE RACE. I need not argue here that as soon as God had finished creation he "blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it." In this same second chapter of Genesis we read that God "put man into the garden of Eden to dress it," (God still owned it). In the very next sentence God reserved a certain definite portion of the fruit for Himself. The destiny of the race depended on keeping this law. Some have thought that the eating of a little fruit was a trivial matter for an infinite issue. Nothing could have been more fundamental. Here at the very birth of the race God established His right to say that a certain definite portion of Man's income was His. The sin of our first parents that drove them from the garden of Eden was to take of the portion which God had reserved to Himself. The second argument for the antiquity of this law is taken from the story of Cain and Abel. Did you ever think of who taught them to make an offering? Can you conceive of God teaching this art to a new race and not teaching how, and how much, to offer? The facts remain: both made an offering. Cain's was rejected. I used to wonder as a boy, "What was the matter with Cain's offering?" That something was wrong is evident. God has not left us in the dark. The Septuagint, that most ancient Greek version of the Old Testament, says, "If thou hast offered aright and hast not divided aright hast thou not sinned?". The sin of Cain was to hold back some of God's portion. More light is given by the writer of the Hebrews. "By faith: Abel offered up a more excellent offering than Cain." The Greek for "more excellent" is pleiona, meaning fuller, richer, larger, more complete. The sin of Cain was that he tried to "rob God." The account of Abraham, the tither, is found in Genesis 14. Read it carefully. How did he come to give the tenth? There is but one explanation. He lived under the conviction that "the most high God" was "possessor of heaven and earth," and that one-tenth of man's income belonged to Him. He returned goods to the King of Sodom that were his by right of capture, but of the tenth he had no option. It was God's. Who taught Abraham to tithe? We must believe that somewhere in that dim age, God placed His hand on the tithe, forever claiming it as his own. This occurred in the garden of Eden, and the law passed from generation to generation to every nation of the ancient world. In the 28th Chapter of this same first book of the Bible is the story. of Abraham's grandson Jacob, and his tithing vow. Do you ask is it religious to tithe? Read this chapter. Think of the extreme spiritual exaltation of that moment. Think of the ladder, the angels, the vision of God, and His promise. No wonder Jacob said, "How dreadful is this Page 4 place! This is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven." This, my friends, is the scene of that song that draws us into the presence of God, "Nearer My God to Thee." I think that when we get as near to God as Jacob was there will be no question about. tithing. But was this not a strange vow? How did he come to hit on the tenth? Surely in some way he knew it to be the will of God. He had example in his grandfather and doubtless in his father. Now as he leaves home to establish a home of his own, and as now he will have an income, he makes up his mind to follow the example of him who was called "the friend of God." What a splendid example for every young man. The tithe is not only as old as Eden, but universal with the race. Clay tablets found in the ruins of ancient cities show that the nations of the earth to the cast as far as Babylon and to the south as far as Egypt were tithing in the days of Abraham. Dr. Adam Clark says, "Almost all nations of the earth have agreed to give one-tenth to religious use." The learned Grotius says, "From the most ancient ages one-tenth was the portion due to God." While Montacutius says, "Instances are mentioned in history of nations that did not offer sacrifices, -- but none that did not pay tithes." Herodotus. Xenophen. Pliny, Hesiod. and others bear witness to this claim. Must there not have been some divine origin for the practice? GOD'S TWIN LAWS-II AND III. I want to begin by saying a word about the prejudice that may exist on the part of some. Prejudice is the greatest obstacle in the pathway of progress. In nothing that John Bunyan ever wrote did his masterful genius flash forth more clearly than in the Holy War, where he places that old churl, Mr. Prejudice with his sixty deaf men as warder of Eargate. Nothing that even Emmanuel would say could reach Mansoul as long as Prejudice and his men were keeping the gate. I ask you to hear the argument and read the literature sent, then with a fair mind judge whether tithing be the will of God or not. A great jury that would be which would judge and then hear the evidence! The reason why more of us are not convinced on this subject is not. because it is not in the word of God, but because it has not been taught from our pulpits. Why have we been silent on God's plan of financing His kingdom? Is it reasonable to think that God would establish a church with perfect rules and ordinances and no financial plan when this is one of the greatest problems before every church? If God has a plan the sooner we find it the better. "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are God's ways higher than man's ways." The trouble with us is that we have not wanted to find God's way because it cuts to the very heart of our selfishness. Think of our plea-the greatest in the world. If we had the funds we could take it to the ends of the earth. The Mormons and the Adventists have the plan but not the plea. We have been saying that "Where the Scriptures speak we speak." Page 5 Let us do it on the money question with the same positiveness and power that we have on other questions. I propose to show that the Scriptures have spoken on this subject, and that the Tithe is God's way. But because I am presenting the question with such positiveness I hope that no one will think I am trying to force it upon them. All I ask is for you to consider the evidence and decide for yourselves. Be ye eager for the truth, In part I. we established the fact that both of these laws, viz., that one-seventh of our time and one-tenth of our income are God's, are as old as Eden, coeval with the race. II. BOTH ARE FOR MAN'S BENEFIT. It may seem trite to argue that it is for man's benefit to obey God. But all of us have not yet come to believe it. III. BOTH WERE REAFFIRMED (not enacted) IN THE MOSAIC LAW, therefore the abolition of the Mosaic Law did not affect the prior law. In part I. we showed these laws to be coeval with the race. This may seem sufficient to prove this point, but there is more to be said. That the consecration of the Sabbath and the Tithe were prior to Moses has already been established. Let us now make a comparison between these laws. In Ex. 27 and 31 we find that both are "holy unto the Lord." Both go back to creation. Both are reaffirmed in the Mosaic law. Both were added unto by Moses. To the ancient law of the Sabbath day Moses added the Sabbatical observances of the law. The seventh month was a sabbath month. In it came the Feast of Trumpets with the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Tabernacles or Feast of Harvest. The seventh year was a sabbath year in which the land was to rest. The 7x7 or 49th year was the year of Jubilee. To the ancient law of the title which was paid by the Jew for the maintenance of the Temple was added a second tithe for the maintenance of the feasts mentioned above. Every third year a third tithe was given for the poor. Beside the three tithes the Jew also has twelve other kinds of offerings. Thus we read of "tithes and offerings." These were the Sin offering. Burnt offering, Trespass, Peace, Meal, Heave. Wave, Thank, Freewill, First Fruits. First born of man and beast, Offering of Vows. All this beside the three tithes. Now why should the Christian with greater blessings than the Jew give less for the sake of the world than he gave for the sake of Palestine? If the Jew did all of this under a loveless law, what should a Christian do under the law of Love? The Gospel sounds no retreat. Its command is forward. Can cold duty do more under the Law than gratitude under the Gospel? Is the liberty of the New Testament a failure? Must we return to the galling yoke of bondage of the Old Testament? Is Sinai stronger than Calvary? Is the outcome better 6 when Moses sternly drives than when Christ lovingly draws? Is it lawful for a man to be more selfish than was lawful for a Jew? Has Christianity lowered the standard of the virtue of liberality? These are questions to ponder over. Here a legal question arises. What was abolished when the Mosaic Law was done away in Christ? Did the law of the tithe go with the law of animal sacrifice? The Mosaic Law was a temporary statute and the limits of its expiration were set, as Paul says in Gal. 3:19, "It was added because of transgression till the seed (Christ) should come." Now I have here before me the Constitution of Nebraska. This is known as the Fundamental Law. Suppose that our legislature should place a law upon our statute books endorsing or reaffirming some portion of the Fundamental Law. Then suppose that another legislature should repeal that statute. Would that in any way affect the Constitution? Not at all. We have already shown that the law of the tithe was a prior law, a fundamental law as old as the race. The abolition of the Mosaic Law does not affect it in any way. A noted Judge has spoken on this subject. He mentions three rules, "which the experience of the ages has confirmed as wise, and which are of universal acceptance in the civil courts-and which may be found in any law text book-1. A temporary statute, expiring by its own limitation, leaves the law as it found it. (Rule 2 and 3 omitted here.) Under each of the three above rules it is submitted that the case of the tithe is made out, and that a clearer case is hard to find in the courts. If a civil case falls within any of these rules it is sustained. If in a matter of money between one man and another, one of these rules would be sufficient, shall not all three suffice in a matter between us and our Maker?"-Judge J. P. Hobson, of Kentucky. The New Testament is not silent on this point. The third chapter of Galatians shows that we pass over Moses to Abraham for the law of Justification by faith. "The law (of Moses) which came four hundred and thirty years after (Abraham) cannot disannul that it should make the promise of none effect." The abolition of the Mosaic law does not affect the prior law of justification by faith. It only abolishes the types and shadows that were fulfilled in Christ, national institutions and feasts and the tithe that maintained them. Christ abolished no fundamental law. If we say the tithe is abolished because it is in the Mosaic law we might as well also say the law, "thou shalt not kill" was abolished. We know these are not merely Jewish laws, but fundamental laws as old as Eden and universal with the race.. The same is true of the law of the tithe. It was reaffirmed (not enacted for the first time) in the Mosaic law, therefore the abolition of the Law of Moses did not affect the law of the tithe, for it was a temporary statute, expiring by its own limitation, and left the law as it found it. 7 GOD'S TWIN LAWS-IV. Jesus Endorsed the Law of the Tithe. If we can successfully build this proposition on the foundation laid in former sermons, we shall have as a superstructure, a battlement which will stand like the Rock of Gibraltar, which no billowy onslaught can throw down. Let us consider first Jesus' endorsement of the law that one-seventh of man's time belongs to God. Did Jesus keep the Sabbath? He lived under the law of the Sabbath and He kept it. He may not have kept it according to Pharisaical interpretation, but He kept God's law of the Sabbath. The Jews accused Him of not keeping the law of the Sabbath on several occasions. In Matt. 12 and Luke 6 we have the story Jesus and His disciples going through the grain fields. The Pharisees of said, "Thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath day!" They did not object to them eating the wheat, but rubbing it out. After the Law had been written which said no manner of work should be done on the Sabbath, the Traditions of the Elders had been framed by the Great Synagogue. These contained 39 prohibitions. Out of these prohibitions came a great host of inferior rules. Plucking and rubbing out heads of wheat on the Sabbath was one of them. As an illustration of the validity of these rules for the Jews, I will cite a historical instance. In 1492 the Jews were expelled from Spain. Being forbidden to enter the city of Fez they were compelled for a time to live on grass. To keep from breaking this rule instead of plucking it with their hands they got down on their knees and cropped it with their teeth. Again if a Jew put out a lamp on the Sabbath for fear of robbers he was guiltless but if he did it to save oil he was guilty. Jesus ridiculed the Jews for their additions to the Law. In Matthew 15 when they said, "Why do thy disciples transgress the traditions of the elders?" He said, "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" In Matt. 23 He said "the Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat; .. they bind heavy burdens and grievious to be borne, and . lay them on men's shoulders." As an illustration of this they had to pay the requirements of the law at the temple in Jewish money. That is why there were money changers in the temple in the days of Jesus. These money changers charged two dollars of Roman money, the legal tender of the day, for one dollar of Jewish money. So Jesus drove them out cowering beneath His vigorous lash. When Jesus restored sight to the blind man on the Sabbath they said, "This man is not of God for he keepeth not the Sabbath." True, He did not keep it according to their notions, but can you imagine Jesus living under the law of the Sabbath, God's law, and being disobedient to it? Jesus respected God's ancient law, and on each Sabbath went into the synagogue "as His custom was." Jesus stood for the seventh day, not necessarily [sic] for the seventh day of the week, but one day in seven. After the resurrection the day was changed from the seventh to 8 the first day of the week. This was done in honor of the resurrection, a fundamental fact of Christianity. The ancient principle of one-seventh of the time being God's remained and has stood through the centuries. What about the tithe, was it changed too? There was a reason for every change that was made. The reason for changing the day was to honor the resurrection. The reason for abolishing the bloody sacrifices was that they were fulfilled in Christ the great Antitype. With the sacrifices went the Altar and the white robed priests. The typical passed with the old dispensations. The types and shadows were fulfilled in Christ. Was there any reason why they should remain? They ought to have passed away. Was the tithe typical? If it was a shadow what was the substance? What did it foreshadow? Was there any reason why it should pass away? There are many reasons why it should remain. Now in coming to Jesus and the tithe, it is much easier to maintain the case of Jesus and the tithe than the case of Jesus and the Sabbath. First we have: The endorsement of His rearing. Jesus was a Jew. He was reared in the home of His mother, Mary and Joseph, his foster. father. What kind of a home was this? What was the training of His early years? We know what kind of a woman Mary was. The angel said, "Thou hast found favor with God." Matthew bears testimony that Joseph was a righteous man. In the Jewish conception that meant a man who kept the law. Joseph did keep the law. (Luke, 2:21-24, 39-41.) Can you think other of Joseph than that he kept the law of the tithe. and taught it to his household as was required by the law? Jesus was reared in that atmosphere and He was obedient to his parents. (Luke, 2:51.) This brings us to the next point: 2. The endorsement of His practice. Until He was thirty years of age we understand that He worked in the carpenter shop. If He worked. he must have had an income, especially during the years between 20 and 30. If He had an income He tithed it. I can not think of Jesus living in open disobedience to one of the laws of His Father, which had been in force since the foundation of the race. Can you? If you say it was not necessary for Him to tithe because He was to give Himself upon the cross, you might as well argue that he was not baptized because it was not necessary. But he was baptized. Even He, the spotless Lamb, in whose sunlit character there was no flaw, came to thew waters the Jordan, saying, "suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness." I venture to say that that same Jesus paid the financial requirements of the law. Can you imagine. Him trying to crawl out from under them on any pretext? But we are not left to guess at the matter. Matthew 17:24-27 settles the question. "They that received the half-shekel came to Peter, and said Doth not your teacher pay the half shekel? He saith, Yea." Notice he did not say "I think so." This was an annual tax imposed by the law of Moses on every male Jew over 20 years of age, for the upkeep of the temple. Jesus would not have had to pay this because he was the 9 Son. He paid it as a matter of expediency. This was a rule of His life. This is why He was baptized. He paid it, lest he "cause them to stumble." Would this same reason not hold good for His paying the tithe? If He had not paid this requirement of the law, how the Pharisees would have used it against Him. They would have said, "O you, claim to be the Son of God, but will not keep the law of God! O who you, are you greater than Moses who gave us the law? Are you greater than our father Abraham, who paid the tithe to the priest of God most high? Are you greater than our father Jacob, who made the tithing vow when on the way to Haran?" O how they who tithed mint, anise, and cummin, would have made over it! Many times they accuse Him of not keeping the Sabbath. Did you ever read anywhere of them accusing Him of not paying the tithe? Is this not one of the strongest proofs that He paid the tithe? But a stronger proof is that he taught men this they "ought not to leave undone." Therefore he did it. He not only preached but He practiced what He preached. This brings us to the next point: 3. The endorsement of His teaching. Jesus differed from Moses on many subjects, in that He enlarged on him and went deeper. Matt. 5:17-19, 21-22, 28-23, 38-29, 43-44, When He came to the subject of the tithe did He go forward or backward? Did He abrogate it? Where is the chapter and verse? He endorsed it on at least two occasions. Six months before the last Passover He dined at the house of a Pharisee. Luke, 11:42: "Woe unto you Pharisees for ye tithe mint and rue, and every herb, and pass over justice and the love of God: but these ought ye to have done and not to leave the other undone." Almost six months later or five days before Jesus' last passover. He again addresses the Pharisees. This time it was in the temple. "Ye tithe mint, anise and cummin and have left undone the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith, but these ye ought to have done and not to have left the other undone." Thus twice Jesus emphatically said ye, ought not to leave tithing undone. If it is objected that this was said to a Pharisee and not to a Christian, then we reply that the Golden Rule or "Thou shalt love the Lord with all thy heart" also have no application to us. Nearly all the teaching of Jesus was given to Jews. Here are two unmistakable endorsements of Jesus to the tithe. How many do we want, to know it is His will. The Golden rule was given but twice. In Matthew 22: we have a question about tribute money. Jesus said, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's." There was tribute to be paid to the Government according to law. Jesus said, Pay it. There was a tribute to be paid to God according to His law, viz., the tithe. Jesus said, Pay it. The Pharisees knew perfectly well. "The tithe is the Lord's." They saw the point without a doubt. Page 10 Jesus not only endorsed the tithe but He went on beyond. To the rich your ruler He said, "Sell all ** If he had been minded to obey, Jesus might have stopped him as God stopped Abraham in offering his son, and said, "Regard thy possession as a talent from God, to be used to His glory." Jesus went beyond the title in His endorsement of the widow who gave "all her living." I imagine that if some tightwad of the 20th Century church had stood where Jesus was, he would have said, "Too bad, too bad, some one should tell her she can't afford it." Jesus commended her because she gave more than the tithe. He did not commend the others because they were simply paying their debts, doing their duty, doing what Jesus said they ought to do. The tithe is a debt; it is what we owe. Often we should give more. Every case of giving mentioned in the New Testament is mentioned because it went beyond the tithe. The members of the Jerusalem church sold their possessions and brought all and laid it at the Apostle's feet. They did not do as some modern Christians, say all belongs to God, and use ninety-nine one-hundredths of it upon themselves and give God one one-hundredth. They brought all, A-L-L and laid it down at the feet of the apostles. Giving is one of the central ideas of the Bible. The texts on this subject form a milky way from Genesis to Revelation, with the galaxy most multitudinous around the Star of Bethlehem. Jesus spent much time on the subject of money. It has been pointed. out that one verse out of every six in Matthew, Mark and Luke is on money. The majority of His parables and addresses are on some phase of the money question. Sixteen of His parables show the right or wrong use of money. It would be instructive to go over these here if space would permit. GOD'S TWIN LAWS-V. The Twin Laws Were Endorsed by the Apostles and Early Christian Church. We need not spend much time on the law that one-seventh of our time belongs to God, according to the Apostles. This is conceded by all. After the resurrection of Jesus the Disciples kept the first day of the week. On this day their Lord arose in triumph, exalting the day. On this day Christ made his appearance to the women, to Mary, to the Disciples on the way to Emmaus. On this day Jesus appeared to the Disciples when Thomas was absent. Further honoring the day He absented Himself from them till another First Day of the week and appeared to them again when Thomas was present. The Day of Pentecost came on the First Day of the week. On this day the church was established, the Holy Spirit given, three thousand men baptized, the first fruits of the Kingdom, Twenty years later Paul came to Troas and tarried a few days so he could be with them "on the first day of the week when we were come together to break bread." (Acts 20:7.) Just 11 before this Paul had directed the church at Corinth to bring together their alms on the first day of the week. (1. Cor. 16:2.) Twenty-five years later a scene appears, in the foreground of which is an aged. apostle, the last survivor of the original twelve, refreshing his solitude at Patmos by "being in the Spirit on the Lord's Day." Within the next half century, Pliny and Justin, heathen and Christian, persecutor and martyr, give with many others their testimony that the First Day of the week was observed by Christians. Thus it passed into secular history with a thousand witnesses bearing testimony to this claim. We have no command of Jesus or the Apostles to keep the day, yet we feel that this is sufficient. I will show that the New Testament is stronger on keeping the law of the tenth than the law of the seventh. Some object to the tithe because there is not more about it in the New Testament. I used to drive a team that took three or four commands to make them go. But I'never had to say "whoa" more than once. So we demand many stern commands to make us go and do, but it only takes a suggestion to make us stop and rest. For the Lord's Day there is nothing but precedent, no direct command of Jesus or of the Apostles. On the tithe we have not only apostolic precedent and command, but the "Ye ought" of Jesus. Why should we demand that God should command us several times. Should not once be sufficient? Jesus commended it several times. How can anything be strong than the "Ye ought" of Jesus? What He commends is our command. Mr. Gladstone says. "To constitute a moral obligation, it is not necessary that we have a positive command. Probable evidence is binding as well as demonstrative evidence, nay, it constitutes the greatest portion of the subject matter of duty." The reason why there is not more in the New Testament about tithing is because it was not necessary. The Old Testament was the Bible of the early Christians. In it the instruction is abundant. The writers of the New Testament were Jews. Every one of them paid the tithe. Every member of the Apostolic church understood this requirement of the law. They were zealous for the law. The tendency was to bring over from Judaism more than was required. The apostle Paul gave his life to save the Church from certain Jewish institutions that were fulfilled in Christ. Think you that under these conditions, those men who were zealous for God, under the fullness of the blessing of Christianity, would give less for the substance than they had given for the shadow? It is expressly stated that they gave more. With a world conquest before them would it have been on the part of wisdom to abolish the tithe? Since tithing had been taught for thousands of years and had become firmly fixed as a habit and principle of the race is it not out of reason to think of God abolishing it now? As the Jews of the early church were used to the practice of the tithe so were the Gentiles of the heathen world. Dydimus of Alexandria, says, "It was a Grecian custom to pay the tithes to the gods." Herodotus Page 12 and Xenophon give the same testimony. The Greeks called Apollo "the tenth bearer." Diodorus Siculus, of the first century B. C. says "the Phoenicians and the Carthagenians send a tenth each year to Hercules at Tyre." The Romans called the tenth "The Herculean portion." Lucullus, a rich Roman consul and general, paid a tithe of all to the gods. Dionysius, a Greek historian in the days of Christ, says the same of the Pelagi. Pliny, a Roman author in the days of the apostles, says, "The Ethiopians give a tenth to their gods before they buy or sell any thing. The testimony is overwhelming. Jew and Gentile alike were already well informed on this subject. The apostles wrote on subjects that needed attention,-like "Justification by faith," "The holier life," etc. Therefore any mention of the tithe would be incidental. This is no reason for rejecting the tithe. If it were, think of what a time we would have justifying the use of song books in worship, or even building a house to meet in. If the New Testament were silent on the tithe it would be the natural system for the Apostolic church. It is a well established principle of law, that if a law is in force, and the conditions that called it forth still exist, it remains in force till repealed. The laws of circumcision and animal sacrifice and others are plainly repealed in the New Testament. Where is there a text that in any way weakens the law of the title? The New Testament left this law where it found it. There was nothing to add but the spiritual motive of love to God and man. Every principle of scriptural interpretation, or even common law demands that the law of the tithe stands. I wish for the sake of some, that there were more in the New Testament about the tithe. I wish there were more about several things: about God, the church house, the Lord's Day, the future world, the soul's destiny, the Lord's Supper. Outside of the gospels and I. Corinthians there is no mention of the latter. The tithe is enforced in the Law, the Prophets, the sermons of Jesus, in Corinthians and Hebrews. Although all of this is here, I wish there were more. But there is enough to establish it. The "Ye ought" of Jesus should be enough. That Jesus has spoken on a subject is not enough for some. They must know that the apostles have added their word and testimony. Fortunate enough the tithe is not without the apostolic sanction. I. Cor. 16:2: "Upon the first day of the week, let each one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him." We do not claim that this establishes the tithe. It shows that the divine law is giving in proportion to our income. This is exactly the principle of the tithe. But this does not refer to a system of church finance but rather to a special collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem. Paul's system of financing the Kingdom is given in the ninth chapter of this book. It is too bad that it should be overlooked and this instruction bout a charity fund misused! I. Cor. 9:7-14. Here Paul justifies his right to receive pay for his preaching. "What soldier ever served at his own expense?" Those that Page 13 plant vineyards or feed flocks enjoy the fruit and milk. Paul uses the Mosaic law to justify such actions. Even the ox was to get his living from his work. But this was not written for the ox's benefit, but for ours. If we plow or thresh don't we do it with the hope of partaking? "If we have sown unto you spiritual things is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?" Paul says he did not use this right so as not to hinder the gospel. He says, "Know ye not" (please note this was not spoken to a Pharisee but to Christians). Alluding to the Mosaic law in Num. 18:21, he says, "Know ye not that they that minister about sacred things eat of the things of the temple, and they that wait upon the altar have their portion with the altar? Even so did the Lord ordain. that they that proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel.""Even so" (This argument might have been used in any sermon on Jesus' endorsement of the tithe). Even so did the Lord ordain that it should be in the Christian Dispensation, i. e., as God ordained in the O. T. so Christ has ordained in the N. T. that those who minister about sacred things should be supported by the tithe. I challenge any man to show an apostolic endorsement of the Lord's Day that is any stronger than this endorsement of the tithe. All we have about the Lord's Day is inferential, and based on precedent. In Hebrews 7 we have a lesson on types and antitypes.  Under the law, Levi, men that die, paid tithes to Melchizedek through Abraham. v. 9. The people, brethren of Levi, paid tithes through Levi and Abraham to Melchizedek. Thus all paid the tithe. In Christ the Mosaic order was abolished and the order of Melchizedek re-established. This order also is supported by the tithe. The divinely inspired apostle is showing the superiority of Christ. If Christ does not receive the tithe He is not only inferior to Melchizedek but also to Levi. "men who die." If Christ does not receive the tithe then the apostle's argument is irrelevant, yes, an utter failure, yea, more, an unrefuted argument on the other side. If He does not receive the tithe then the figure is broken and incomplete. The conclusion is that as Abraham paid the tithe so the Christian, the antitype, should honor the greater King of Righteousness.
14 GOD'S TWIN LAWS-VI. The Twin Laws Were Endorsed by the Church Fathers of the First Five Centuries. For the first endorsement of the Law of the Seventh I will quote a heathen witness. Eight years after the Apostle John had written the Book of Revelation, Pliny, the persecutor, wrote a letter to the Emperor, describing what the Christians were wont to do. "On a stated day the Christians meet to sing a hymn to Christ as God, to take an oath to commit no theft, adultery, or fraud, and to partake together of food." This was a heathen description of a Christian Sunday observance. About thirty-five years later Justin Martyr tells us what the set day was, that was spoken of by Pliny. He says, "On the day called Sunday the Christians held their assemblies for reading the Scriptures, prayer to Christ, alms-giving, and the Lord's Supper." To these we might add the testimony of many others, among them, Eusebius, Tertullian, Constantine, who made Sunday observance a law of the Empire, Justinian, who incorporated the same in his code, and Charlemagne who made it a law in the West. This is the unanimous judgment of the Fathers of the first centuries. Their endorsement and practice of the Law of the seventh is a commentary on the words and practice of the apostles, who were their teachers. Now what do these same writers say of the Law of the Tenth? In these quotations lack of space compels us to omit much of the context which would add much to the argument. First we shall hear Clement. He was born the year Jesus was baptized. Paul mentions him in Phil. 4:3. He wrote a letter to the Corinthians somewhere between 68 and 97 A. D. In this letter he says, "It behooves us to do all things which the Lord has commanded us to do at stated times. He has enjoined offerings, not to be performed thoughtlessly or irregularly. Those therefore that present their offerings at the appointed time are accepted and blessed." He then speaks of the services of the high priest and levites, who were supported by the tithe and adds "The layman is bound by the laws that pertain to layman." Clement evidently understood that the ministry of the church was to be supported in the same way as the ministry of the temple. The same idea is carried out in the "first fruits" of the next reference. The document known as "The Teaching of the Apostles" dates. back to 120 A. D. Here we read. "But every true prophet that is willing to abide among you is worthy of his support. So also a true teacher …. Every first fruit, therefore, of the products of the wine press and threshing floor, etc., etc., thou shalt take and give to the prophets for they are your high priests. But if ye have not a prophet, give to the poor." A century later Clement of Alexandria made the same argument. "The tithes of the fruits and of the flocks taught piety toward the deity. For it was from these and from the first fruits that the priests were 15 maintained. We now therefore understand that we are instructed in piety, and in liberality, and in justice, and in humanity, by the law." Justin Martyr, A. D. 110-165 shows how the church in his day was continuing the apostolic communism, and like the church in Jerusalem, whose gifts far exceeded the tithe, had sufficient to care for all. Irenaeus, A. D. 120-202. "The precepts of the perfect life are the same in each Testament... . The Lord did not abrogate the natural precepts of the law, which also those who are justified by faith, did observe previous to the giving of the law, but He extended them. Instead of thou shalt not commit adultery,' forbid even concupiscence: instead of 'thou shalt not kill,' He prohibited anger; instead of tithes. to share all with the poor. Now all these were not doing away with the law but extending it. Sacrifices there were among the people (the Jews); sacrifices there are too in the Church; but the species alone. have been changed, inasmuch as the offering is now made, not by slaves, but by freemen." We must pass the testimony of Tertullian, A. D. 145-220, also of Origen, A. D. 185-254. Only this, He says "we offer first fruits to Him to Whom we send up our prayers." He then asks a question worthy of our consideration, "How can our righteousness exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, who pay tithes and first fruits, if we do none of these things?" Cyprian, A. D. 200-258, chides those who do not pay the tithe. "They used to give for sale houses and estates, that they might have treasures in heaven. Now we do not even give the tithe, and while our Lord bids us sell we buy and add to our store. Thus has the strength of believers grown weak." In the Apostolic Constitution, A. D. 300, we read "Of the first fruits and tithes and after what manner the Bishop is himself to partake of them and distribute them to others. Let him use these tenths and first fruits, which are given according to the command of God, as a man of God. So also let him dispense in a right manner the free will offerings, which are brought in on account of the poor. . . The Levites who attended upon the tabernacle partook of those things which were offered to God by all the people... You therefore, O bishops, are priests and levites, ministering to the church... For those who attend upon the church ought to be maintained by the church. . . . Now you ought to know that although the Lord has delivered you from the additional bonds and does not permit you to sacrifice irrational creatures for sin-offerings, etc., yet He has nowhere freed you from those oblations which you owe to the priests, nor from doing good to the poor." Jerome, A. D. 345-420, wrote to Nepotian, "I, if I am the portion of the Lord, and the line of His heritage, receive no portion among the remaining tribes; but like the priests and the Levites I live on the tithe, and serving the altar am supported by its offerings. Having food and 16 raiment, I shall be content with these, and as a disciple of the cross, shall share its poverty. What we have said of tithes and offerings which of old used to be given to priests and levites, understand also in the case of the church-to whom it is commanded to sell all and follow the Lord. If we are unwilling to do this, at least let us imitate the rudimentary teachings of the Jews so as to give a part of the whole. . . . If any one shall not do this he is convicted of defrauding and cheating God." Ambrose of Milan, A. D. 340-397, "God has reserved the tenth part unto himself, and therefore it is not lawful for a man to retain what God had reserved for Himself. To thee He has given nine parts, for Himself He has reserved the tenth part, and if thou shalt not give to God the tenth part, God will take from thee the nine parts." "A good Christian pays tithes." Augustine, A. D. 354-430, "Our ancestors used to abound in wealth of every kind for this very reason that they used to give tithes and pay the tax to Caesar. Now on the contrary because devotion to God has ceased the drain of the treasury has increased. We have been unwilling to share the tithes with God, now the whole is taken away. The scribes and pharisees give tithes for whom Christ had not yet shed His blood. ... I can not keep back what He who died for us said while He was alive, 'Except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and pharisees ye shall in no case enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. They gave a tenth. How is it with you? Ask yourselves. Consider what you spend on mercy, what you reserve for luxury." Can you imagine anything more up to date than this? Chrysostom, A. D., 347-407, "They gave tithes and tithes upon tithes for orphans and widows and strangers; Whereas some one was saying to me in astonishment at another, Why such a one gives tithes. What a load of disgrace does this expression imply since what was not a matter of wonder with the Jews has come to be so in the case of the Christian? If there was danger then in omitting tithes, think how great it must be now.... If he who is giving the half achieves no great thing, he who does not bestow so much as a tenth, of what shall he be worthy?" With reason He said, "There are few that be saved." Cassian, of the fifth century emphasizes the same thought. "Even if those who faithfully offer tithes and are obedient to the more ancient precepts of the Lord, cannot yet climb the heights of the gospel, you can see very clearly how far short of it those fall who do not even do this." As the church fathers speak with one voice on this subject so have the councils of the church. The Council of Macon passed the following decree, A. D. 585: ".... The divine laws also taking care of the ministers of the church that they might have their hereditary portion, have commanded all people to pay the tithes, that the clergy being hindered by no sort of employment, may be at leisure for the spiritual 17 duty of their ministry. Which laws the whole body of Christians for a long time kept inviolate, but now by degrees, almost all of them have shown themselves prevaricators of those laws, since they neglect to fulfill the things which have been divinely ordained." Ten other councils. of the church up until A. D. 790 have ordered all Christians to tithe, viz., the councils of Ancyra, Gangra, Orleans, Metz, Tours, Neville, Rouen, Nantes, Toledo, and Fimli. Tithing was well established in the time. of Charlemagne, and made imperative by the legatine councils in England. Thus we see what unanimity of opinion there was among the ancient fathers of the Christian Church. Their testimony is valuable in establishing the practice of the earliest Christian centuries. For this practice there must have been apostolic endorsement and apostolic precedent. THE DEEPER MEANING OF TITHING Tithing, to a degree and in a practical common sense way, not approached by any other habit of life, brings God into personal relationship in our every-day affairs. Tithers become increasingly conscious not only of responsibility to, but of real partnership with the Infinite. When the wages or salary, or gains of any kind or from any source, are received, the pleasure of setting apart or crediting to tithing account God's portion is only equalled by that of giving it later to such objects as conscience approves. In the last analysis tithing is simply putting God, not self, first. The conscientious tither devotes, sets aside, the tenth as soon as it is received. It is the "first fruits" of his labor or gain, no matter from what source received. It is God's share, the "devoted," the "separated" portion, and has first place in all thoughts of expenditure. Tithing, in other words, is literal everyday common sense obedience to Christ's command "Seek first the Kingdom of God." Comments are closed.
|