Tuesday, December 26, 2006
$5 million
If New Hope was to receive a New Year's gift of five million dollars how would you want the church to spend it? Would you spend the whole amount in one area or would you divide it up into smaller pieces? I could give you some ideas but I will leave it very general at the moment.
Friday, December 22, 2006
When will Christ return?
I have a unique theory of when Jesus will return. See if you agree or how you would describe his readiness to return.
In Matthew 24:14 Jesus said that this gospel of the kingdom would be preached in all the world for a witness to all nations and then the end would come. Later on in the same chapter he said that his coming would be as in the days of Noah when people were eating and drinking and were oblivious to the floods coming until it actually arrived.
Here is the BIG question. How can Jesus return if there are children constantly being born and growing into the age of accountability? Will Jesus save these children based on where their parents stand? Will Jesus save these children based on what decisions they would make if time was to last longer? Will Jesus treat them as if they have never lived? So since they have no chance of salvation they will not face punishment either.
2 Pter 3:9 says that God does not want anyone to perish but all come to salvation. I believe that Jesus gives us the clue in Matt. 24:36-39, being as in the days of Noah. The world had reached such a state of rebellion that no one was making a decision for God. Noah preached for 120 years and only his family entered the ark.
So today. The world will become worse and worse until evangelism dries up. No one is making a decision for Christ and it doesn't matter how many babies are born none of them will decide for Christ just as no one was making that decision in Noah's day. When this happens Jesus will return because there is no one left to save. What do you think?
In Matthew 24:14 Jesus said that this gospel of the kingdom would be preached in all the world for a witness to all nations and then the end would come. Later on in the same chapter he said that his coming would be as in the days of Noah when people were eating and drinking and were oblivious to the floods coming until it actually arrived.
Here is the BIG question. How can Jesus return if there are children constantly being born and growing into the age of accountability? Will Jesus save these children based on where their parents stand? Will Jesus save these children based on what decisions they would make if time was to last longer? Will Jesus treat them as if they have never lived? So since they have no chance of salvation they will not face punishment either.
2 Pter 3:9 says that God does not want anyone to perish but all come to salvation. I believe that Jesus gives us the clue in Matt. 24:36-39, being as in the days of Noah. The world had reached such a state of rebellion that no one was making a decision for God. Noah preached for 120 years and only his family entered the ark.
So today. The world will become worse and worse until evangelism dries up. No one is making a decision for Christ and it doesn't matter how many babies are born none of them will decide for Christ just as no one was making that decision in Noah's day. When this happens Jesus will return because there is no one left to save. What do you think?
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Adventist Positives
In this Christmas season we are encourage to be positive, to give thanks, to bless others, and be reminded of all the goods things that happened to us during the year.
I dedicate this post to the good things about Adventism. Much has been written about the negative aspects of our faith but there are many good things too. What have you found to be a great blessing in the teachings of Adventism? I could list quite a few but one that I am most thankful for is our emphasis on health and our heritage of health. I use the eight natural remedies, acronym--A STEWARD-- as guiding principles for my life. Good health is much more than not smoking, drinking alcohol, using drugs, it is all about balance in life. Now it is your turn.
I dedicate this post to the good things about Adventism. Much has been written about the negative aspects of our faith but there are many good things too. What have you found to be a great blessing in the teachings of Adventism? I could list quite a few but one that I am most thankful for is our emphasis on health and our heritage of health. I use the eight natural remedies, acronym--A STEWARD-- as guiding principles for my life. Good health is much more than not smoking, drinking alcohol, using drugs, it is all about balance in life. Now it is your turn.
Monday, December 11, 2006
Adventism Bible mistakes
When I was a young pastor I preached that everything that Adventism taught could be proved from the Bible. I have since come to realize that I was wrong. Adventism has its traditions and its "truths" that it inherited from other Christian groups. What are some of the teachings and practices of Adventists that you believe are non-biblical?
Let me start if off by comenting on our theology of ordination. Our theology comes right out of the Roman Catholic church not from the Bible. We have three levels of ordination: Deacon, Elder, Pastor. Deacon is inferior to elder which is inferior to pastor with you having to be ordained each time you take on one of these offices. In the Catholic church it is deacon, priest, and bishop, in that order with bishop being superior to priest and priest superior to deacon.
You find bishop, pastor, elder, deacon, in the New Testament but there is no hint that there were three separate ordinations required to fill these offices. There is much more I could say on this subject but this is enough for now. Now it is your turn. Where were we creatures of our culture such as ordination? And where do we need to change?
Let me start if off by comenting on our theology of ordination. Our theology comes right out of the Roman Catholic church not from the Bible. We have three levels of ordination: Deacon, Elder, Pastor. Deacon is inferior to elder which is inferior to pastor with you having to be ordained each time you take on one of these offices. In the Catholic church it is deacon, priest, and bishop, in that order with bishop being superior to priest and priest superior to deacon.
You find bishop, pastor, elder, deacon, in the New Testament but there is no hint that there were three separate ordinations required to fill these offices. There is much more I could say on this subject but this is enough for now. Now it is your turn. Where were we creatures of our culture such as ordination? And where do we need to change?
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Joining the church
The New Testament tells of people being baptized the first time the evangelist met them, eg. Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch, the Philippian jailer and Paul. In the Adventist tradition there are 28 doctrines a person is supposed to study or at least 13 if you believe the 13 questions on the back of the baptismal certificate are the minimum. How much should a person understand before they are baptized? We baptize children from 8 years onwards. They do not study all 28 or even all 13. Some adults are like children do not have a great capacity to understand all these doctrines but they do love Jesus.. Now some will reply that we should separate baptism from membership but that begs another question: What is the real meaning of baptism? Since we do not believe it is a sacrament (a means of salvation) but a symbol, what is it a symbol of? If You read Romans 6 and 1 Cor 12 you find that it is a symbol of the death and resurrection of Jesus and also becoming part of his body. The local church is the body of Christ. When a baby is born we expect it to become part of a family, immediately, not get adopted in years later. When a person is baptized they need to be part of a family, so how they just be baptized and yet not recognize that they are now part of the body of Christ, the local church, which is the local expression of His universal body. Your thoughts?
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Writings Newman reply to Storehouse
A Reply to “Where Is The Storehouse?”
Revised October 14, 1997
J. David Newman, D.Min., former editor of Ministry, is now the senior pastor of New Hope Adventist Church, Fulton, Maryland
Article
Robert J. Kloosterhuis is to be commended for his honesty and candor in his article, “Where is the Storehouse?” in the August 1997 issue of Ministry. The subject of where the tithe is to be paid has become a source of controversy and it is important for church leaders to address this issue. Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your viewpoint, the very virtues that commend this piece also undermine its central thesis.
My response should not be construed as an attack on the current system. I simply want to show that there is more than one perspective, that there are alternatives, and if we want people to continue to be faithful in paying their tithe through the proper channels we need to understand their viewpoints. Instead of reacting to change the church could be proactive and start developing solutions while there is time. I believe very strongly in the Seventh-day Adventist church and its divine mission. But that does not mean that everything it does is perfect or cannot be improved upon.
Kloosterhuis begins by asking the following questions: “When it comes to the returning of tithe, is the storehouse the local conference or the local church? . . . Which is biblical?” He immediately answers his own question by saying “Unfortunately, the Bible does not provide a clear answer.” Since the Bible does not provide a clear answer it is wise to refrain from dogmatism on this subject. Kloosterhuis attempts to do this by using words such as “it appears,” and “this passage suggests.” But it is obvious that Kloosterhuis really wants a “clear answer” and by the end of his article Kloosterhus is convinced that the Bible clearly designates that the local conference is the storehouse.
His conclusion number six implies that there would be nothing wrong with designating the local church as the storehouse. Here is where his honesty is refreshing. This conclusion reveals that we are not dealing with a theological or moral issue but a policy or ecclesiological one.
There is a problem inherent with the term storehouse as used by our church. Storehouse suggests a repository, a storage area, a collection point. Where do we tell our members to pay their tithe? To the local church. The local church collects and stores the tithe and at regular intervals forwards it on to the conference or mission office. For all practical purposes the local church is the storehouse, even in Adventist practice. However, the local church cannot spend any of that tithe. If we are to be consistent with the data presented by Elder Kloosterhuis we should instruct our members to send all their tithes directly to the local conference office.
Levites and the tithe
Kloosterhuis admits that “there may be some validity in the argument that the remittance locally of tithe to the Levites took place in small villages and towns at certain times in the past.” Logic would dictate this to be the case. The Levites and priests received their income from the tithe. They were scattered throughout Israel. Why would the whole population bring the tithe to a central location, taking several days to get there, and then make all the Levites and priests also travel to that central location in order to take the tithes back to their local areas?
Kloosterhuis makes much of the reforms of Nehemiah and the return of tithes to the temple. Those reforms did take place but there is nothing to suggest in the passages that all the people brought all their tithes to that one central location. Certainly tithe was brought there and even stored for future use but why would Levites and priests, again, travel from all over Israel to get their salaries, if you will, and then return home again? This would be especially true considering the way tithe was mainly paid—in produce and animals. How often each year would each Levite family have to make the trek to the Temple to collect their share of the tithe, goats, sheep, corn, etc.? How do you store animals anyway? By the time of Malachi tithing had become much more centralized but that did not mean that was the ideal way or the only way to give the tithe to the Lord.
If we are going to argue so strongly for following the Old Testament detail of the exact location of the storehouse then we should be consistent and argue for all the details. For example, the people paid their tithes to the Levites who then paid a tithe to the priests and the priests did not pay a tithe to anyone since the tithe was given for their support. “In this way you also will present an offering to the LORD from all the tithes you receive from the Israelites. From these tithes you must give the LORD'S portion to Aaron the priest” (Numbers 18:28) [ All texts are from the New International Version.] “A priest descended from Aaron is to accompany the Levites when they receive the tithes, and the Levites are to bring a tenth of the tithes up to the house of our God, to the storerooms of the treasury” (Nehemiah 10:38).
If our system is based on the biblical system of tithe paying then we should not require our pastors to pay tithe. The Levites were the teachers and educators of Israel. Maybe the tithe should support all the teachers; then the teachers would pay a tithe to support the pastors, the pastors would not pay tithe. This would take care of the problem of non-tithe paying pastors! It is a little strange that tithe is given for the support of the gospel ministry and those paid by it have to immediately give ten percent back that will then be used in the next pay period to pay them again! In essence the church gets a ten percent discount on its employees.
I know the arguments that are used to prove that pastors should pay tithe like everyone else but they already receive a salary lower than other professionals with similar educational backgrounds. Pastors demonstrate every day their sacrificial giving by working for the wages they are paid. When I first entered the ministry in Scotland we had to save for six months just to buy a towel rail to place in the bathroom (my wife did not work outside the home since we had two small children).
Ellen White and tithe
Kloosterhuis cannot find much in Ellen White to support the conference or mission being the exclusive designation for the storehouse. In fact, Ellen White used her tithe to support white and colored ministers outside of the regular channels. Some people even sent her their tithes, which she accepted, and put to good use outside of the regular channels. [ Ellen G. White, “Watson Letter,” Spalding-Magan’s Unpublished Manuscript Testimonies of Ellen G. White, pp. 215-216.] The church has tried very hard to downplay this aspect of Ellen White’s ministry but it cannot deny that a precedent had been set. A person is not sinning if they desire to pay their tithe through alternative storehouses.
Now there is a very pragmatic reason why the conference office has been designated the storehouse. Local churches do not pay their ministers directly. Therefore it makes sense for them to return tithes to the local conference office for this purpose. But does this mean that no tithe can be retained at the local level to pay for additional ministerial personnel? No. At least one conference has begun returning a percentage of tithe back to the local church to be spent as they desire. [ Southeastern California Conference in 1997 remitted back to each local church ten percent of their 1996 tithe increase over 1995. This amounted to some $120,000. Telephone call to Ellen Morse secretary to the treasurer, Tom Staples ( October 2, 1997).]
In conclusion five Kloosterhuis states that according to Ellen White church members should pay their tithes to the conference office because this is what the church has decided and “church members should obey the voice of the church because Christ has delegated to His church the right of decision.” That would be true if church member had much of a say in running the church and deciding the tithe policies. These policies are decided by Annual Councils where only 11 percent of the members are non-church employees. [ There are 260 members of the General Conference Committee. Thirty-six of these are lay people, three from each of the 12 divisions. At Annual Council time the local conference presidents of the division where the Council is being held are invited to attend with voice and vote. When the Annual Council is held in North America 58 conference presidents are added to the 260 regular members making a total of 318.] This means that the 89 percent who are employed by the church have a vested or conflict of interest in determining where the tithe is collected and how it is spent. We argue that we run a representative system of government. In practice we run a hierarchial system. If we ran a representative system we would ask each of the members of the General Conference Committee, the representatives of the people, to poll their constituents and ask them what they want. Unless we do this how do we really know whose interests we are representing?
I believe that if we let the church members make the decision we would see some major changes taking place. Many are already making that decision by where they pay their tithe. We will not reverse the trend by attempting more legislation. We need to listen to what the people are saying. God speaks through the body of believers as well as speaking through their elected leaders.
World mission and tithe
Kloosterhuis then says that if we were to change our system “It would, in all probability, destroy one of the most remarkable systems of church financing witnessed in the past century and a half. The world mission program, as it now exists, would cease to function.” Several points need to be made regarding this claim.
First, maybe our system needs to be destroyed and a new one built (however, I am not advocating that!). As Jesus said “Can you place new wine into old wineskins without destroying the wineskins?” (Luke 5:37,38).
Second, the Mormons have more church members than we do, they are growing faster than we are, and they have no paid clergy or paid bureaucracy. We have 13,787 evangelistic and pastoral workers in the field worldwide and 13,742 in administrative and promotional positions in the conference, union, division, and General Conference. [ The following information is from page 6 of the 133rd Annual Statistical Report--1995
Denomination workers are classified by types of employment. They are divided into General Workers and Institutional Workers. There are 52,358 General Workers and 91,664 Institutional Workers.
The General Workers are broken down into five categories: Evangelistic and pastoral, Administrative and promotional, Primary school teachers, Bible Instructors, Literature Evangelists. Since Literature Evangelists are paid from commissions and primary school teachers are really institutional I am leaving them out of the equation. This leaves the following:
Evangelistic and Pastoral (Ordained and Licensed) = 13,787
Administrative and Promotional (Ordained and Other) = 13,742
As you can see there is almost a one to one ratio of people in the field and people in the office. Now about another 100 could be added to the evangelistic and pastoral category because there is no provision in the Statistics for women pastors who receive Commissioned Ministerial credentials and licenses. But there are still not many of them. There is also a miscellaneous category called Other under Evangelistic and Pastoral which I ignore. This category lists 2,645 persons. When I checked to see who these people are (for who are pastors and evangelists other than pastors and evangelists) I found a most curious situation. The office of Archives and Statistics could not tell me the purpose of this category. I investigated North America and found that some unions had placed their elementary teachers in this category (when there is a separate category for them). I also found that some colleges placed their ordained religion teachers in this category rather than under Institutional Workers (Colleges). This section seems to be a catch-all that has no bearing on people actually working in the field, so I left this section out in my calculations. ]
All of these people are paid from tithe. In addition we pay a third of the salaries of elementary teachers from tithe; we pay the principal, Bible teachers, men’s and women’s deans in our academies and colleges from tithe. No wonder we are unable to OBEY the counsel of Ellen White who says we should pay minister’s wives from the tithe. [ “There are minister’s wives. . . giving Bible readings and praying with families, helping along by personal efforts just as successfully as their husbands. These women give their whole time, and are told that they receive nothing for their labors because their husbands receive their wages. I tell them to go forward and all such decisions shall be reversed. The Word says, ‘The laborer is worthy of his hire.’ When any such decisions as this is made, I will in the name of the Lord, protest. I will feel it in my duty to create a fund from my tithe money, to pay these women who are accomplishing just as essential work as the ministers are doing, and this tithe I will reserve for work in the same line as that of the ministers, hunting for souls, fishing for souls.” Ellen G. White Manuscript Releases, Vol. 5, #267.] There is no money left.
Third, I remember the discussion at the Bangalore, India, Annual Council (1993) concerning the need for fields to become self sufficient. We voted that all divisions cease to be dependent on the General Conference for operating subsidies. I believe that has now been reached except for one or two divisions. We no longer need to fund the overseas divisions in the same manner as before. We would not “destroy our mission work” if we changed the way tithe is allocated.
Church leaders have said that if members are upset with the way higher levels spend the tithe they can make their voice heard but they still need to pay their tithe through the proper channels. It is interesting to note that at one time we allowed our members to “divert” their tithe if they were unhappy with how it was being spent. Some questions arose in 1907 about responsibility in tithe paying. Ellen White was still alive but very frail so it fell on her son Willie White to publish the following regarding the use of tithe:
“As to the proper use of the tithe: The outline of a statement upon this subject which was agreed upon was briefly this: To give extracts from Sister White’s writings as to the tithe and its use; to show that her testimony and her own usual practice was in favor of paying the tithe into the regularly designated treasury, to be used under the counsel of the committees appointed for such purposes; to show further from her writings that when those who have charge of the expenditure of the tithe so far fail in the discharge of their duty that the regularly organized channels for the distribution of the tithe becomes hindrances to its proper use, then in order to carry out the divine plan that the tithe should be expended in the wisest manner for the furtherance of the work, individuals have the right to pay their tithes direct to needy fields; but this involves a considerable degree of personal responsibility, which must be assumed by those who decide to follow this plan. It was thought that this matter could be handled in a way to show that the departure from the regular lines was authorized only when the regular plans failed to be carried out by those in positions of responsibility.”[ W. C. White, Memorandum of Plans Agreed Upon in Dealing with “The Blue Book.”From the Ellen G. White Estate, File #213.]
Gospel and tithe
Kloosterhuis, as has already been stressed, begins his article by saying that the Bible is not clear on where the storehouse is but then seeks to make it almost a moral issue that we must pay our tithe through the conference or mission office. This is contrary to grace and righteousness by faith. Paul says that “each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Cor. 9:7 ). Salvation is something that we must choose freely, voluntarily. We respond to God because of His great love in giving Jesus to die for us.
Giving our money is giving ourselves to God. He wants us to do that “cheerfully,” freely, without compulsion. When we mandate where people must give their money it will be easy for some people to become confused about salvation. Rather, we should explain the benefits of paying tithe to the conference and then make it clear to people that they have complete freedom to choose where to pay their tithe and they will not be considered second class members if they choose otherwise.
Since “the Bible does not provide a clear answer” we dare not go beyond what God has made plain. Teach tithing? Yes? Teach church structure? Yes. Teach the need for tithe to be paid to the conference? Yes. Teach that this is the only option for a faithful church member? No. We do not make tithe paying a test of fellowship. Let’s give people the same freedom in where they pay their tithe.
There is nothing sacred about church structure. It can be changed at any time. Policies and structures are servants of the mission of the church which is to take the gospel to all the world. Instead of digging in our heels and saying what was good enough for the past is good enough for the present we should be examining creative and innovative ways that will enable us to spread the gospel more efficiently and effectively. New wineskins are needed for new and changing times.
I know Robert Kloosterhuis personally to be a true servant of God and what he wrote was his sincere effort to defend the current system. I trust that he and other church leaders will not be offended by my critique of his article. A church becomes all the stronger when we can debate in love the issues before us. Our church was built on debate and discussion and out of that consensus developed. Let us be as brave as our pioneers.
I have tried to follow Paul’s counsel to “speak the truth in love,” so that “we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work” (Ephesians 4:15-16).
Revised October 14, 1997
J. David Newman, D.Min., former editor of Ministry, is now the senior pastor of New Hope Adventist Church, Fulton, Maryland
Article
Robert J. Kloosterhuis is to be commended for his honesty and candor in his article, “Where is the Storehouse?” in the August 1997 issue of Ministry. The subject of where the tithe is to be paid has become a source of controversy and it is important for church leaders to address this issue. Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your viewpoint, the very virtues that commend this piece also undermine its central thesis.
My response should not be construed as an attack on the current system. I simply want to show that there is more than one perspective, that there are alternatives, and if we want people to continue to be faithful in paying their tithe through the proper channels we need to understand their viewpoints. Instead of reacting to change the church could be proactive and start developing solutions while there is time. I believe very strongly in the Seventh-day Adventist church and its divine mission. But that does not mean that everything it does is perfect or cannot be improved upon.
Kloosterhuis begins by asking the following questions: “When it comes to the returning of tithe, is the storehouse the local conference or the local church? . . . Which is biblical?” He immediately answers his own question by saying “Unfortunately, the Bible does not provide a clear answer.” Since the Bible does not provide a clear answer it is wise to refrain from dogmatism on this subject. Kloosterhuis attempts to do this by using words such as “it appears,” and “this passage suggests.” But it is obvious that Kloosterhuis really wants a “clear answer” and by the end of his article Kloosterhus is convinced that the Bible clearly designates that the local conference is the storehouse.
His conclusion number six implies that there would be nothing wrong with designating the local church as the storehouse. Here is where his honesty is refreshing. This conclusion reveals that we are not dealing with a theological or moral issue but a policy or ecclesiological one.
There is a problem inherent with the term storehouse as used by our church. Storehouse suggests a repository, a storage area, a collection point. Where do we tell our members to pay their tithe? To the local church. The local church collects and stores the tithe and at regular intervals forwards it on to the conference or mission office. For all practical purposes the local church is the storehouse, even in Adventist practice. However, the local church cannot spend any of that tithe. If we are to be consistent with the data presented by Elder Kloosterhuis we should instruct our members to send all their tithes directly to the local conference office.
Levites and the tithe
Kloosterhuis admits that “there may be some validity in the argument that the remittance locally of tithe to the Levites took place in small villages and towns at certain times in the past.” Logic would dictate this to be the case. The Levites and priests received their income from the tithe. They were scattered throughout Israel. Why would the whole population bring the tithe to a central location, taking several days to get there, and then make all the Levites and priests also travel to that central location in order to take the tithes back to their local areas?
Kloosterhuis makes much of the reforms of Nehemiah and the return of tithes to the temple. Those reforms did take place but there is nothing to suggest in the passages that all the people brought all their tithes to that one central location. Certainly tithe was brought there and even stored for future use but why would Levites and priests, again, travel from all over Israel to get their salaries, if you will, and then return home again? This would be especially true considering the way tithe was mainly paid—in produce and animals. How often each year would each Levite family have to make the trek to the Temple to collect their share of the tithe, goats, sheep, corn, etc.? How do you store animals anyway? By the time of Malachi tithing had become much more centralized but that did not mean that was the ideal way or the only way to give the tithe to the Lord.
If we are going to argue so strongly for following the Old Testament detail of the exact location of the storehouse then we should be consistent and argue for all the details. For example, the people paid their tithes to the Levites who then paid a tithe to the priests and the priests did not pay a tithe to anyone since the tithe was given for their support. “In this way you also will present an offering to the LORD from all the tithes you receive from the Israelites. From these tithes you must give the LORD'S portion to Aaron the priest” (Numbers 18:28) [ All texts are from the New International Version.] “A priest descended from Aaron is to accompany the Levites when they receive the tithes, and the Levites are to bring a tenth of the tithes up to the house of our God, to the storerooms of the treasury” (Nehemiah 10:38).
If our system is based on the biblical system of tithe paying then we should not require our pastors to pay tithe. The Levites were the teachers and educators of Israel. Maybe the tithe should support all the teachers; then the teachers would pay a tithe to support the pastors, the pastors would not pay tithe. This would take care of the problem of non-tithe paying pastors! It is a little strange that tithe is given for the support of the gospel ministry and those paid by it have to immediately give ten percent back that will then be used in the next pay period to pay them again! In essence the church gets a ten percent discount on its employees.
I know the arguments that are used to prove that pastors should pay tithe like everyone else but they already receive a salary lower than other professionals with similar educational backgrounds. Pastors demonstrate every day their sacrificial giving by working for the wages they are paid. When I first entered the ministry in Scotland we had to save for six months just to buy a towel rail to place in the bathroom (my wife did not work outside the home since we had two small children).
Ellen White and tithe
Kloosterhuis cannot find much in Ellen White to support the conference or mission being the exclusive designation for the storehouse. In fact, Ellen White used her tithe to support white and colored ministers outside of the regular channels. Some people even sent her their tithes, which she accepted, and put to good use outside of the regular channels. [ Ellen G. White, “Watson Letter,” Spalding-Magan’s Unpublished Manuscript Testimonies of Ellen G. White, pp. 215-216.] The church has tried very hard to downplay this aspect of Ellen White’s ministry but it cannot deny that a precedent had been set. A person is not sinning if they desire to pay their tithe through alternative storehouses.
Now there is a very pragmatic reason why the conference office has been designated the storehouse. Local churches do not pay their ministers directly. Therefore it makes sense for them to return tithes to the local conference office for this purpose. But does this mean that no tithe can be retained at the local level to pay for additional ministerial personnel? No. At least one conference has begun returning a percentage of tithe back to the local church to be spent as they desire. [ Southeastern California Conference in 1997 remitted back to each local church ten percent of their 1996 tithe increase over 1995. This amounted to some $120,000. Telephone call to Ellen Morse secretary to the treasurer, Tom Staples ( October 2, 1997).]
In conclusion five Kloosterhuis states that according to Ellen White church members should pay their tithes to the conference office because this is what the church has decided and “church members should obey the voice of the church because Christ has delegated to His church the right of decision.” That would be true if church member had much of a say in running the church and deciding the tithe policies. These policies are decided by Annual Councils where only 11 percent of the members are non-church employees. [ There are 260 members of the General Conference Committee. Thirty-six of these are lay people, three from each of the 12 divisions. At Annual Council time the local conference presidents of the division where the Council is being held are invited to attend with voice and vote. When the Annual Council is held in North America 58 conference presidents are added to the 260 regular members making a total of 318.] This means that the 89 percent who are employed by the church have a vested or conflict of interest in determining where the tithe is collected and how it is spent. We argue that we run a representative system of government. In practice we run a hierarchial system. If we ran a representative system we would ask each of the members of the General Conference Committee, the representatives of the people, to poll their constituents and ask them what they want. Unless we do this how do we really know whose interests we are representing?
I believe that if we let the church members make the decision we would see some major changes taking place. Many are already making that decision by where they pay their tithe. We will not reverse the trend by attempting more legislation. We need to listen to what the people are saying. God speaks through the body of believers as well as speaking through their elected leaders.
World mission and tithe
Kloosterhuis then says that if we were to change our system “It would, in all probability, destroy one of the most remarkable systems of church financing witnessed in the past century and a half. The world mission program, as it now exists, would cease to function.” Several points need to be made regarding this claim.
First, maybe our system needs to be destroyed and a new one built (however, I am not advocating that!). As Jesus said “Can you place new wine into old wineskins without destroying the wineskins?” (Luke 5:37,38).
Second, the Mormons have more church members than we do, they are growing faster than we are, and they have no paid clergy or paid bureaucracy. We have 13,787 evangelistic and pastoral workers in the field worldwide and 13,742 in administrative and promotional positions in the conference, union, division, and General Conference. [ The following information is from page 6 of the 133rd Annual Statistical Report--1995
Denomination workers are classified by types of employment. They are divided into General Workers and Institutional Workers. There are 52,358 General Workers and 91,664 Institutional Workers.
The General Workers are broken down into five categories: Evangelistic and pastoral, Administrative and promotional, Primary school teachers, Bible Instructors, Literature Evangelists. Since Literature Evangelists are paid from commissions and primary school teachers are really institutional I am leaving them out of the equation. This leaves the following:
Evangelistic and Pastoral (Ordained and Licensed) = 13,787
Administrative and Promotional (Ordained and Other) = 13,742
As you can see there is almost a one to one ratio of people in the field and people in the office. Now about another 100 could be added to the evangelistic and pastoral category because there is no provision in the Statistics for women pastors who receive Commissioned Ministerial credentials and licenses. But there are still not many of them. There is also a miscellaneous category called Other under Evangelistic and Pastoral which I ignore. This category lists 2,645 persons. When I checked to see who these people are (for who are pastors and evangelists other than pastors and evangelists) I found a most curious situation. The office of Archives and Statistics could not tell me the purpose of this category. I investigated North America and found that some unions had placed their elementary teachers in this category (when there is a separate category for them). I also found that some colleges placed their ordained religion teachers in this category rather than under Institutional Workers (Colleges). This section seems to be a catch-all that has no bearing on people actually working in the field, so I left this section out in my calculations. ]
All of these people are paid from tithe. In addition we pay a third of the salaries of elementary teachers from tithe; we pay the principal, Bible teachers, men’s and women’s deans in our academies and colleges from tithe. No wonder we are unable to OBEY the counsel of Ellen White who says we should pay minister’s wives from the tithe. [ “There are minister’s wives. . . giving Bible readings and praying with families, helping along by personal efforts just as successfully as their husbands. These women give their whole time, and are told that they receive nothing for their labors because their husbands receive their wages. I tell them to go forward and all such decisions shall be reversed. The Word says, ‘The laborer is worthy of his hire.’ When any such decisions as this is made, I will in the name of the Lord, protest. I will feel it in my duty to create a fund from my tithe money, to pay these women who are accomplishing just as essential work as the ministers are doing, and this tithe I will reserve for work in the same line as that of the ministers, hunting for souls, fishing for souls.” Ellen G. White Manuscript Releases, Vol. 5, #267.] There is no money left.
Third, I remember the discussion at the Bangalore, India, Annual Council (1993) concerning the need for fields to become self sufficient. We voted that all divisions cease to be dependent on the General Conference for operating subsidies. I believe that has now been reached except for one or two divisions. We no longer need to fund the overseas divisions in the same manner as before. We would not “destroy our mission work” if we changed the way tithe is allocated.
Church leaders have said that if members are upset with the way higher levels spend the tithe they can make their voice heard but they still need to pay their tithe through the proper channels. It is interesting to note that at one time we allowed our members to “divert” their tithe if they were unhappy with how it was being spent. Some questions arose in 1907 about responsibility in tithe paying. Ellen White was still alive but very frail so it fell on her son Willie White to publish the following regarding the use of tithe:
“As to the proper use of the tithe: The outline of a statement upon this subject which was agreed upon was briefly this: To give extracts from Sister White’s writings as to the tithe and its use; to show that her testimony and her own usual practice was in favor of paying the tithe into the regularly designated treasury, to be used under the counsel of the committees appointed for such purposes; to show further from her writings that when those who have charge of the expenditure of the tithe so far fail in the discharge of their duty that the regularly organized channels for the distribution of the tithe becomes hindrances to its proper use, then in order to carry out the divine plan that the tithe should be expended in the wisest manner for the furtherance of the work, individuals have the right to pay their tithes direct to needy fields; but this involves a considerable degree of personal responsibility, which must be assumed by those who decide to follow this plan. It was thought that this matter could be handled in a way to show that the departure from the regular lines was authorized only when the regular plans failed to be carried out by those in positions of responsibility.”[ W. C. White, Memorandum of Plans Agreed Upon in Dealing with “The Blue Book.”From the Ellen G. White Estate, File #213.]
Gospel and tithe
Kloosterhuis, as has already been stressed, begins his article by saying that the Bible is not clear on where the storehouse is but then seeks to make it almost a moral issue that we must pay our tithe through the conference or mission office. This is contrary to grace and righteousness by faith. Paul says that “each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Cor. 9:7 ). Salvation is something that we must choose freely, voluntarily. We respond to God because of His great love in giving Jesus to die for us.
Giving our money is giving ourselves to God. He wants us to do that “cheerfully,” freely, without compulsion. When we mandate where people must give their money it will be easy for some people to become confused about salvation. Rather, we should explain the benefits of paying tithe to the conference and then make it clear to people that they have complete freedom to choose where to pay their tithe and they will not be considered second class members if they choose otherwise.
Since “the Bible does not provide a clear answer” we dare not go beyond what God has made plain. Teach tithing? Yes? Teach church structure? Yes. Teach the need for tithe to be paid to the conference? Yes. Teach that this is the only option for a faithful church member? No. We do not make tithe paying a test of fellowship. Let’s give people the same freedom in where they pay their tithe.
There is nothing sacred about church structure. It can be changed at any time. Policies and structures are servants of the mission of the church which is to take the gospel to all the world. Instead of digging in our heels and saying what was good enough for the past is good enough for the present we should be examining creative and innovative ways that will enable us to spread the gospel more efficiently and effectively. New wineskins are needed for new and changing times.
I know Robert Kloosterhuis personally to be a true servant of God and what he wrote was his sincere effort to defend the current system. I trust that he and other church leaders will not be offended by my critique of his article. A church becomes all the stronger when we can debate in love the issues before us. Our church was built on debate and discussion and out of that consensus developed. Let us be as brave as our pioneers.
I have tried to follow Paul’s counsel to “speak the truth in love,” so that “we will in all things grow up into him who is the Head, that is, Christ. From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work” (Ephesians 4:15-16).
Monday, November 27, 2006
Writings Storehouse
This is an article that was published in Ministry and to which I wrote a reply. See my reply in the next blog. There is no need to comment on this post but you can on my reply.
WHERE IS THE STOREHOUSE?
Robert J Kloosterhuis, Vice-President of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adentists
Published in the August, 1997 issue of Ministry.
Is the storehouse the local conference? Or the local church? It may surprise you but the Bible does not sanction either one as the storehouse! There are those who believe the storehouse should be the local church. They see parallels in the practices of ancient Israel. They contrast the present practice of Seventh-day Adventists with that of Scripture and say it is not biblical to have the local conference as the storehouse. On the other hand the world church follows the plan of the local conference/mission as the storehouse. Which is biblical? Unfortunately, this question is not easily answered by a crystal clear statement of Scripture either in favor of the local church or of the local conference.
A review of ancient Israel’s usage of the storehouse principle can shed some light to help us ascertain what latter day Israel’s practice ought to be. We begin with a familiar text:—“Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, so that there may be food in my house, and thus put me to the test, says the LORD of hosts; see if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you an overflowing blessing” (Mal 3:10 NRSV, emphasis supplied). What was the prophet’s intended meaning and his hearers’ understanding of the term “storehouse” when Malachi spoke the above words? Is contemporary denominational practice contrary to, or at least not fully in harmony with, Malachi’s intentions? Some sincere people are wondering why the local church is not the storehouse. Perhaps a more basic question is: Are Seventh-day Adventists following biblical principles, when they designate the local conference as the storehouse?
Storehouse in the Old Testament
The earliest reference regarding the remittance of tithe is of Abraham returning tithe to the high priest Melchizedek (Gen 14: 20). This brief allusion of Abraham paying tithe indicates that he returned tithe to an individual. This particular reference could lead us to understand that Melchizedek was considered by Abraham to be the storehouse.
Before crossing the Jordan River, the Lord instructed the Israelites to return all tithes to Him (Lev 27:30, 32) and He would “give to the Levites all the tithes in Israel as their inheritance in return for the work they do while serving at the Tent of Meeting” (Num 18:21 NRSV). The Levites also were instructed to tithe (v 28).
Following the conquest of Canaan, the Levites, given the fact that they were to “have no allotment in their land, nor have any share” (Num 18:20) lived in scattered areas usually near one of the 48 specially designated cities (Num 35:6). Soon after the crossing of the Jordan the Israelites pitched the Tabernacle at Gilgal, then later at Shechem, Shiloh, Nob and Gibeon. All male Israelites were enjoined to come and worship at least three times annually (Ex 23:17) and were instructed to bring their offerings with them for “no one is to appear . . . empty-handed” before the Lord (Ex 23:15). Only at the place designated by the Lord could sacrifices be offered (Deut 12:11).
Those who view the local church as the storehouse may cite Deut 14:22-29 as support. This is seen by Jewish scholars as the “second tithe.” [See Jewish Encyclopedia, art. “Tithe in Rabbinical Literature.] ”Ellen White concurs with this interpretation. [See Patriarchs and Prophets, page 530. Deut 14:28 indicates there was even a “third tithe.”] It is vital to keep in mind that just as there were many ceremonial sabbaths but only one holy weekly Sabbath, so also careful study reveals that there were other tithes along with the sacred tithe used only for Levitical support.
Period of the Monarchy
Early in his reign David brought the ark of God to Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6). His son, Solomon, constructed a beautiful temple in Jerusalem which became a permanent place for the storehouse (1 Kings 6). With the passing of time the practice of returning tithes and offerings to one of the nearest 48 designated cities was discontinued. It appears that all Israelites returned directly to the temple storehouse the required tithes and offerings.
Note the practice in vogue during Hezekiah’s reign. “He commanded the people who lived in Jerusalem to give the portion due to the priests and the Levites, so that they might devote themselves to the law of the Lord. As soon as the word spread, the people of Israel gave in abundance the first fruits of grain, wine, oil, honey, and of all the produce of the field; and they brought in abundantly the tithe of everything. The people of Israel and Judah who lived in the cities of Judah also brought in the tithe of cattle and sheep, and the tithe of the dedicated things that had been consecrated to the Lord their God, and laid them in heaps. In the third month they began to pile up the heaps, and finished them in the seventh month. When Hezekiah and the officials came and saw the heaps, they blessed the Lord and his people Israel. Hezekiah questioned the priests and the Levites about the heaps. The chief priest Azariah, who was of the house of Zadok, answered him, ‘Since they began to bring the contributions into the house of the Lord, we have had enough to eat and have plenty to spare; for the Lord has blessed his people, so that we have this great supply left over.’ Then Hezekiah commanded them to prepare store-chambers in the house of the Lord; and they prepared them. Faithfully they brought in the contributions, the tithes and the dedicated things” (2 Chr 31:4-12 NRSV, emphasis supplied).
This passage suggests that following the division of the twelve tribes, the 48 specially-designated cities with the Levites living near them no longer functioned as the cities had during the period of the Judges. Now with different conditions in the cities, it was more expedient to return the tithes and offerings directly to the temple in Jerusalem.
Post Babylonian Captivity
Following the Babylonian Captivity, under Nehemiah’s reformatory leadership, he reintroduced the tithing and remittance systems as practiced earlier. “And the priest, the descendant of Aaron, shall be with the Levites when the Levites receive the tithes; and the Levites shall bring up a tithe of the tithes to the house of our God, to the chambers of the storehouse” (Neh 10:37-39 NRSV). “On that day men were appointed over the chambers for the stores, the contributions, the first fruits, and the tithes, to gather into them the portions required by the law for the priests and for the Levites from the fields belonging to the towns; for Judah rejoiced over the priests and the Levites who ministered” (Neh 12:44 NRSV). [These verses give the impression that the only tithe brought to Jerusalem was the Levitical tithe of the tithe for the priests and that the 90 percent was stored in the local villages. However, Neh 12:44 is not as clear as we would like; the meaning is not certain. “The portions required by the Law for the priests and the Levites” were brought to the temple. These portions included the tithe as suggested in verse 47: “All Israel gave the daily portions for the singers and the gatekeepers. They set apart that which was for the Levites; and the Levites set apart that which was for the descendants of Aaron.” All these tithes were stored in the temple.
Perhaps Neh 10:38 is simply saying the Levites brought their own tithe of the tithes to the temple, and the people brought theirs to the local storage places in the villages. The other passages indicate that all tithe went to Jerusalem for storage.]
Later between Nehemiah’s two terms as governor, the people lapsed into apostasy and stopped returning the tithe. Upon his return, Nehemiah remonstrated both leaders and people for neglecting the house of God (Neh 13:11). They repented and reinstated the tithing system (v 12). It was during this period of time that God, through the prophet Malachi, called on His people to reform in both corporate and individual lifestyles. “Will anyone rob God? Yet you are robbing me! But you say, ‘How are we robbing you?’ In your tithes and offerings” (Mal 3:8 NRSV). Then follows our Lord’s command and promise: “Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, so that there may be food in my house, and thus put me to the test, says the Lord of hosts; see if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you an overflowing blessing” (v 10 NRSV). Notice that the words “storehouse” and “my house” refer to the same location.
Where was the storehouse? Clearly it was the temple in Jerusalem.
The thrust of Malachi’s words and the people’s understanding of them was clear. Both understood the word “storehouse” to refer to the sanctuary, the temple in Jerusalem. There may be some validity in the argument that the remittance locally of tithe to the Levites took place in the small villages and towns at certain times in the past. But at the time of Nehemiah and Malachi, it was unequivocally understood that Malachi was referring to the temple in Jerusalem as the storehouse.
New Testament Practice
Only eleven verses in the New Testament refer to tithe. Not one of them gives any information regarding the storehouse. Thus we are unable to ascertain how early Christian believers practiced the “storehouse” principle. The New Testament does tell us that Paul collected funds from some churches for the poor believers in Jerusalem suffering from famine. Paul, along with certain brethren, took the offerings to Jerusalem (2 Cor 8:19). Apart from a few instances about offerings there is no information of collecting the tithe. Hence we are left to rely on the Old Testament for understanding the meaning of “storehouse” and its usage.
Denominational Usage
Two years before the organization of the General Conference, a small group of leaders and believers convened in Battle Creek, April 26–29, 1861, to make preparation for the incorporation of the publishing association which came to be known as the Review and Herald. Prior to this meeting many members felt that the time had come to consider denominational organization as well. (There were many who opposed formal organization of the church.) Thus during the publishing conference it was voted that the nine ministers present write an address for the Review and Herald on that subject.
The outcome was a carefully prepared conference address entitled “Organization,” signed by J. H. Waggoner, Joseph Bates, James White, J. B. Frisbie, J. N. Loughborough, M. E. Cornell, E. W. Shortridge, Moses Hull, and John Byington. It set forth the basic principles that have guided the denomination ever since. The writers proposed (1) a more thorough organization of local churches; (2) proper organization of “state or district conferences,” which would grant ministerial credentials; (3) the holding of “general conferences” that would be “fully entitled to the name” as representing the will of the churches. The article appeared in the June 11, 1861 issue of the Review and Herald.
The article indicated that at the local church level there should be elders and deacons. At the state level, the conference would authorize the licenses of ministers to preach, pay the ministers, hold title of church properties, and receive the tithe. The general conference would be a convening of delegates of all state conferences and would reflect the will and thinking of all the local churches.
The Seventh-day Adventist form of church government reflects characteristics of several systems—particularly the congregational, with its emphasis on local church authority; the presbyterian, which provides for church government by elected representatives; and in some points the Methodist, because it has conferences as organizational units which assign ministers to the local churches. However, these features were not conscious imitations, but grew out of the situations and needs of the developing Seventh-day Adventist movement.
By October of 1861 the first conference of the future Seventh-day Adventist Church was organized—the Michigan Conference. One of the first items of business was to arrange a fixed salary for the ministers of the Michigan Conference. It also issued letters of credentials which were renewed annually. The source of the funds came from the members via the churches composing the new conference. This resolution in essence had the practical effect of making the conference the storehouse.
Two years later in 1863, the General Conference was formally organized. At the same meeting a model constitution for state conferences was prepared and recommended to the delegates for all state conferences. Article III of the newly recommended model constitution said, “Funds were to be raised by the Systematic Benevolence plan and other gifts, and reported regularly to the conference treasurer.” This Article informs us that our pioneers intended that the source of funding for the local conference should come from the members of constituent churches of the state conference. Thus the tithe and other offerings would form the base for conference finances. This fund was to be used for the support of evangelistic/ ministerial work.
The General Conference work was at first financed by irregular appropriations from the state conferences. In 1878 the General Conference Committee recommended that conferences pay a tithe on their income to the General Conference. Later when union conferences were organized in 1901, the conferences paid tithe of their income to the unions, which in turn paid tithe to the General Conference. [The preceding five paragraphs are a summary of the article, “Organization, Development of, In the Seventh-day Adventist Church,” SDA Encyclopedia, 1976, 10:1042-1054.]
It must be noted that local churches did not employ and pay the salaries of ministers. Nor did they grant licenses and credentials. It was the newly organized local conference that assumed these responsibilities. Today local churches are not legal entities, but the local conference association is. Churches join together to form a conference/association which serves their needs as a legally recognized body to hire and supervise the ministry, to pay the ministers’ salaries, and to collect tithe and offerings from the churches to fund evangelistic endeavors. The local churches having no legal status which precluded their employing ministers on an individual basis, delegated to the local conference these responsibilities. At present newly organized local churches are accepted into “the sisterhood of churches” in the local conference based on these same conditions at regularly called constituency meetings.
What was Mrs White’s understanding of the term “storehouse”? Note what she said in 9T 249, “If our churches will take their stand upon the Lord’s Word and be faithful paying their tithe into His treasury, more laborers will be encouraged to take up ministerial work.” In the context of what she said “treasury” is clearly the local conference.
Mention should be made of a time when Dr Kellogg was returning to the local conference all the sanitarium workers’ tithe and was contemplating discontinuing this practice. Mrs White was in great distress at the thought. “For him to separate the tithe from the treasury,” she wrote, “would be a necessity I greatly dread” (Letter 51a, 1898).
Very little can be found in her writings about the “storehouse” principle simply because it was not an issue.
Advantages of the conference storehouse
To suggest that the local church become the storehouse is possible. But at what cost? It would seriously disrupt and discombobulate the organizational and governance structure of the denomination, as we now know it. It would, in all probability, destroy one of the most remarkable systems of church financing witnessed in the past century and half. The world mission program, as it now exists, would cease to function.
How grateful we are that our Lord led the pioneers to establish the present system of church finance. By adopting the concept of the local conference as the storehouse, a small band of believers laid the necessary foundational financial support for the miraculous development of the remnant church into one of the most remarkable world missionary movements in modern times. It is based on the Biblical principle of returning an honest tithe and designating the local conference as the storehouse. The Spirit of Prophecy never disagreed with this procedure, a practice paralleling nearly fifty years of her ministry. Mrs. White upheld the principle of designating the local conference as the storehouse. If it had been morally wrong, she would certainly have had much to say to right that wrong. But this is not the case. There is not one sentence objecting to the practice.
Conclusion
From our brief discussion we can note the following points:
1. Scripture teaches that tithe is to be returned to the storehouse.
2. Tithe remittance practices always involved either the Tabernacle storehouse or the Temple storehouse in Jerusalem
3. In the Old Testament the location of the storehouse was not always permanent, because the Tabernacle storehouse moved periodically from place to place until it was located permanently in Jerusalem.
4. Because the temple storehouse in Jerusalem no longer exists, the Seventh-day Adventist Church in general assembly decides the location of the storehouse.
5. Actions taken by our founding fathers to designate the local conference as the storehouse were within the will of God.
No inspired message came from Mrs White to contradict this action. She in fact wrote that church members should obey the voice of the church because Christ has delegated to his church the right of decision.
6. There is no prohibition in Scripture to designate either the local conference or the local church as the storehouse, and from the inception of the organized church, the local conference has been designated the storehouse.
Where is the storehouse?
Where is the storehouse? After more than 130 years of highly successful practice in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, it can be clearly and confidently answered: “The local conference.”
WHERE IS THE STOREHOUSE?
Robert J Kloosterhuis, Vice-President of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adentists
Published in the August, 1997 issue of Ministry.
Is the storehouse the local conference? Or the local church? It may surprise you but the Bible does not sanction either one as the storehouse! There are those who believe the storehouse should be the local church. They see parallels in the practices of ancient Israel. They contrast the present practice of Seventh-day Adventists with that of Scripture and say it is not biblical to have the local conference as the storehouse. On the other hand the world church follows the plan of the local conference/mission as the storehouse. Which is biblical? Unfortunately, this question is not easily answered by a crystal clear statement of Scripture either in favor of the local church or of the local conference.
A review of ancient Israel’s usage of the storehouse principle can shed some light to help us ascertain what latter day Israel’s practice ought to be. We begin with a familiar text:—“Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, so that there may be food in my house, and thus put me to the test, says the LORD of hosts; see if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you an overflowing blessing” (Mal 3:10 NRSV, emphasis supplied). What was the prophet’s intended meaning and his hearers’ understanding of the term “storehouse” when Malachi spoke the above words? Is contemporary denominational practice contrary to, or at least not fully in harmony with, Malachi’s intentions? Some sincere people are wondering why the local church is not the storehouse. Perhaps a more basic question is: Are Seventh-day Adventists following biblical principles, when they designate the local conference as the storehouse?
Storehouse in the Old Testament
The earliest reference regarding the remittance of tithe is of Abraham returning tithe to the high priest Melchizedek (Gen 14: 20). This brief allusion of Abraham paying tithe indicates that he returned tithe to an individual. This particular reference could lead us to understand that Melchizedek was considered by Abraham to be the storehouse.
Before crossing the Jordan River, the Lord instructed the Israelites to return all tithes to Him (Lev 27:30, 32) and He would “give to the Levites all the tithes in Israel as their inheritance in return for the work they do while serving at the Tent of Meeting” (Num 18:21 NRSV). The Levites also were instructed to tithe (v 28).
Following the conquest of Canaan, the Levites, given the fact that they were to “have no allotment in their land, nor have any share” (Num 18:20) lived in scattered areas usually near one of the 48 specially designated cities (Num 35:6). Soon after the crossing of the Jordan the Israelites pitched the Tabernacle at Gilgal, then later at Shechem, Shiloh, Nob and Gibeon. All male Israelites were enjoined to come and worship at least three times annually (Ex 23:17) and were instructed to bring their offerings with them for “no one is to appear . . . empty-handed” before the Lord (Ex 23:15). Only at the place designated by the Lord could sacrifices be offered (Deut 12:11).
Those who view the local church as the storehouse may cite Deut 14:22-29 as support. This is seen by Jewish scholars as the “second tithe.” [See Jewish Encyclopedia, art. “Tithe in Rabbinical Literature.] ”Ellen White concurs with this interpretation. [See Patriarchs and Prophets, page 530. Deut 14:28 indicates there was even a “third tithe.”] It is vital to keep in mind that just as there were many ceremonial sabbaths but only one holy weekly Sabbath, so also careful study reveals that there were other tithes along with the sacred tithe used only for Levitical support.
Period of the Monarchy
Early in his reign David brought the ark of God to Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6). His son, Solomon, constructed a beautiful temple in Jerusalem which became a permanent place for the storehouse (1 Kings 6). With the passing of time the practice of returning tithes and offerings to one of the nearest 48 designated cities was discontinued. It appears that all Israelites returned directly to the temple storehouse the required tithes and offerings.
Note the practice in vogue during Hezekiah’s reign. “He commanded the people who lived in Jerusalem to give the portion due to the priests and the Levites, so that they might devote themselves to the law of the Lord. As soon as the word spread, the people of Israel gave in abundance the first fruits of grain, wine, oil, honey, and of all the produce of the field; and they brought in abundantly the tithe of everything. The people of Israel and Judah who lived in the cities of Judah also brought in the tithe of cattle and sheep, and the tithe of the dedicated things that had been consecrated to the Lord their God, and laid them in heaps. In the third month they began to pile up the heaps, and finished them in the seventh month. When Hezekiah and the officials came and saw the heaps, they blessed the Lord and his people Israel. Hezekiah questioned the priests and the Levites about the heaps. The chief priest Azariah, who was of the house of Zadok, answered him, ‘Since they began to bring the contributions into the house of the Lord, we have had enough to eat and have plenty to spare; for the Lord has blessed his people, so that we have this great supply left over.’ Then Hezekiah commanded them to prepare store-chambers in the house of the Lord; and they prepared them. Faithfully they brought in the contributions, the tithes and the dedicated things” (2 Chr 31:4-12 NRSV, emphasis supplied).
This passage suggests that following the division of the twelve tribes, the 48 specially-designated cities with the Levites living near them no longer functioned as the cities had during the period of the Judges. Now with different conditions in the cities, it was more expedient to return the tithes and offerings directly to the temple in Jerusalem.
Post Babylonian Captivity
Following the Babylonian Captivity, under Nehemiah’s reformatory leadership, he reintroduced the tithing and remittance systems as practiced earlier. “And the priest, the descendant of Aaron, shall be with the Levites when the Levites receive the tithes; and the Levites shall bring up a tithe of the tithes to the house of our God, to the chambers of the storehouse” (Neh 10:37-39 NRSV). “On that day men were appointed over the chambers for the stores, the contributions, the first fruits, and the tithes, to gather into them the portions required by the law for the priests and for the Levites from the fields belonging to the towns; for Judah rejoiced over the priests and the Levites who ministered” (Neh 12:44 NRSV). [These verses give the impression that the only tithe brought to Jerusalem was the Levitical tithe of the tithe for the priests and that the 90 percent was stored in the local villages. However, Neh 12:44 is not as clear as we would like; the meaning is not certain. “The portions required by the Law for the priests and the Levites” were brought to the temple. These portions included the tithe as suggested in verse 47: “All Israel gave the daily portions for the singers and the gatekeepers. They set apart that which was for the Levites; and the Levites set apart that which was for the descendants of Aaron.” All these tithes were stored in the temple.
Perhaps Neh 10:38 is simply saying the Levites brought their own tithe of the tithes to the temple, and the people brought theirs to the local storage places in the villages. The other passages indicate that all tithe went to Jerusalem for storage.]
Later between Nehemiah’s two terms as governor, the people lapsed into apostasy and stopped returning the tithe. Upon his return, Nehemiah remonstrated both leaders and people for neglecting the house of God (Neh 13:11). They repented and reinstated the tithing system (v 12). It was during this period of time that God, through the prophet Malachi, called on His people to reform in both corporate and individual lifestyles. “Will anyone rob God? Yet you are robbing me! But you say, ‘How are we robbing you?’ In your tithes and offerings” (Mal 3:8 NRSV). Then follows our Lord’s command and promise: “Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, so that there may be food in my house, and thus put me to the test, says the Lord of hosts; see if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you an overflowing blessing” (v 10 NRSV). Notice that the words “storehouse” and “my house” refer to the same location.
Where was the storehouse? Clearly it was the temple in Jerusalem.
The thrust of Malachi’s words and the people’s understanding of them was clear. Both understood the word “storehouse” to refer to the sanctuary, the temple in Jerusalem. There may be some validity in the argument that the remittance locally of tithe to the Levites took place in the small villages and towns at certain times in the past. But at the time of Nehemiah and Malachi, it was unequivocally understood that Malachi was referring to the temple in Jerusalem as the storehouse.
New Testament Practice
Only eleven verses in the New Testament refer to tithe. Not one of them gives any information regarding the storehouse. Thus we are unable to ascertain how early Christian believers practiced the “storehouse” principle. The New Testament does tell us that Paul collected funds from some churches for the poor believers in Jerusalem suffering from famine. Paul, along with certain brethren, took the offerings to Jerusalem (2 Cor 8:19). Apart from a few instances about offerings there is no information of collecting the tithe. Hence we are left to rely on the Old Testament for understanding the meaning of “storehouse” and its usage.
Denominational Usage
Two years before the organization of the General Conference, a small group of leaders and believers convened in Battle Creek, April 26–29, 1861, to make preparation for the incorporation of the publishing association which came to be known as the Review and Herald. Prior to this meeting many members felt that the time had come to consider denominational organization as well. (There were many who opposed formal organization of the church.) Thus during the publishing conference it was voted that the nine ministers present write an address for the Review and Herald on that subject.
The outcome was a carefully prepared conference address entitled “Organization,” signed by J. H. Waggoner, Joseph Bates, James White, J. B. Frisbie, J. N. Loughborough, M. E. Cornell, E. W. Shortridge, Moses Hull, and John Byington. It set forth the basic principles that have guided the denomination ever since. The writers proposed (1) a more thorough organization of local churches; (2) proper organization of “state or district conferences,” which would grant ministerial credentials; (3) the holding of “general conferences” that would be “fully entitled to the name” as representing the will of the churches. The article appeared in the June 11, 1861 issue of the Review and Herald.
The article indicated that at the local church level there should be elders and deacons. At the state level, the conference would authorize the licenses of ministers to preach, pay the ministers, hold title of church properties, and receive the tithe. The general conference would be a convening of delegates of all state conferences and would reflect the will and thinking of all the local churches.
The Seventh-day Adventist form of church government reflects characteristics of several systems—particularly the congregational, with its emphasis on local church authority; the presbyterian, which provides for church government by elected representatives; and in some points the Methodist, because it has conferences as organizational units which assign ministers to the local churches. However, these features were not conscious imitations, but grew out of the situations and needs of the developing Seventh-day Adventist movement.
By October of 1861 the first conference of the future Seventh-day Adventist Church was organized—the Michigan Conference. One of the first items of business was to arrange a fixed salary for the ministers of the Michigan Conference. It also issued letters of credentials which were renewed annually. The source of the funds came from the members via the churches composing the new conference. This resolution in essence had the practical effect of making the conference the storehouse.
Two years later in 1863, the General Conference was formally organized. At the same meeting a model constitution for state conferences was prepared and recommended to the delegates for all state conferences. Article III of the newly recommended model constitution said, “Funds were to be raised by the Systematic Benevolence plan and other gifts, and reported regularly to the conference treasurer.” This Article informs us that our pioneers intended that the source of funding for the local conference should come from the members of constituent churches of the state conference. Thus the tithe and other offerings would form the base for conference finances. This fund was to be used for the support of evangelistic/ ministerial work.
The General Conference work was at first financed by irregular appropriations from the state conferences. In 1878 the General Conference Committee recommended that conferences pay a tithe on their income to the General Conference. Later when union conferences were organized in 1901, the conferences paid tithe of their income to the unions, which in turn paid tithe to the General Conference. [The preceding five paragraphs are a summary of the article, “Organization, Development of, In the Seventh-day Adventist Church,” SDA Encyclopedia, 1976, 10:1042-1054.]
It must be noted that local churches did not employ and pay the salaries of ministers. Nor did they grant licenses and credentials. It was the newly organized local conference that assumed these responsibilities. Today local churches are not legal entities, but the local conference association is. Churches join together to form a conference/association which serves their needs as a legally recognized body to hire and supervise the ministry, to pay the ministers’ salaries, and to collect tithe and offerings from the churches to fund evangelistic endeavors. The local churches having no legal status which precluded their employing ministers on an individual basis, delegated to the local conference these responsibilities. At present newly organized local churches are accepted into “the sisterhood of churches” in the local conference based on these same conditions at regularly called constituency meetings.
What was Mrs White’s understanding of the term “storehouse”? Note what she said in 9T 249, “If our churches will take their stand upon the Lord’s Word and be faithful paying their tithe into His treasury, more laborers will be encouraged to take up ministerial work.” In the context of what she said “treasury” is clearly the local conference.
Mention should be made of a time when Dr Kellogg was returning to the local conference all the sanitarium workers’ tithe and was contemplating discontinuing this practice. Mrs White was in great distress at the thought. “For him to separate the tithe from the treasury,” she wrote, “would be a necessity I greatly dread” (Letter 51a, 1898).
Very little can be found in her writings about the “storehouse” principle simply because it was not an issue.
Advantages of the conference storehouse
To suggest that the local church become the storehouse is possible. But at what cost? It would seriously disrupt and discombobulate the organizational and governance structure of the denomination, as we now know it. It would, in all probability, destroy one of the most remarkable systems of church financing witnessed in the past century and half. The world mission program, as it now exists, would cease to function.
How grateful we are that our Lord led the pioneers to establish the present system of church finance. By adopting the concept of the local conference as the storehouse, a small band of believers laid the necessary foundational financial support for the miraculous development of the remnant church into one of the most remarkable world missionary movements in modern times. It is based on the Biblical principle of returning an honest tithe and designating the local conference as the storehouse. The Spirit of Prophecy never disagreed with this procedure, a practice paralleling nearly fifty years of her ministry. Mrs. White upheld the principle of designating the local conference as the storehouse. If it had been morally wrong, she would certainly have had much to say to right that wrong. But this is not the case. There is not one sentence objecting to the practice.
Conclusion
From our brief discussion we can note the following points:
1. Scripture teaches that tithe is to be returned to the storehouse.
2. Tithe remittance practices always involved either the Tabernacle storehouse or the Temple storehouse in Jerusalem
3. In the Old Testament the location of the storehouse was not always permanent, because the Tabernacle storehouse moved periodically from place to place until it was located permanently in Jerusalem.
4. Because the temple storehouse in Jerusalem no longer exists, the Seventh-day Adventist Church in general assembly decides the location of the storehouse.
5. Actions taken by our founding fathers to designate the local conference as the storehouse were within the will of God.
No inspired message came from Mrs White to contradict this action. She in fact wrote that church members should obey the voice of the church because Christ has delegated to his church the right of decision.
6. There is no prohibition in Scripture to designate either the local conference or the local church as the storehouse, and from the inception of the organized church, the local conference has been designated the storehouse.
Where is the storehouse?
Where is the storehouse? After more than 130 years of highly successful practice in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, it can be clearly and confidently answered: “The local conference.”
Friday, November 24, 2006
Tithe
I was recently visiting with some old friends from college days. One of them pastors a 2,000 member church in California. We got on the subject of tithe and I mentioned that at New Hope we don't tell people that they MUST pay all their tithe to the conference. His response was "If we don't do that then we will destroy our church structure."
Question: How important is our church structure for the carrying out of our mission. The Catholic church has three levels to carry out its world wide mission. The adventist church has five levels. (To keep things clear. We do not keep any tithe at New Hope. Everything marked tithe is sent to the conference.)
Question: How important is our church structure for the carrying out of our mission. The Catholic church has three levels to carry out its world wide mission. The adventist church has five levels. (To keep things clear. We do not keep any tithe at New Hope. Everything marked tithe is sent to the conference.)
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Future of Adventism
Adventism was raised up to announce the second of Jesus just as John the Baptist was raised up to announce the first coming of Jesus. John lived to see Jesus come. The first generation of Adventists did not. Why are we still here? Is our mission still the same as it was when we began? Could our mission have changed? What is the real mission of the Adventist church today? Is it just to make more Adventists so that in twenty years we can say "There are now fifty million Adventists world wide?"
Aging Church
Median age of the population in the US is 36. Median age in the Adventist church in the US, including all unbaptized children, is 58. What must we do differently to reverse this trend?
Ethical Dilemma
Jack is 92 and on a kidney machine. Ellen is brought into the hospital after an accident and needs a kidney machine within 24 hours or she will die. She is nineteen years old. Do you take the machine off Jack and he will then die within a few hours so that Ellen can live? Or do you leave Jack on the machine since he had it first and let Ellen die? There is only one machine. Please give your reasons for the decision you make.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Vital Issues
If you were to pick the top three issues in the world today what would they be? If you were to make the list for the United States would it change and if so how?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
