Template talk:Social Security

From PreparingYou
Revision as of 20:47, 2 January 2019 by Wiki1 (talk | contribs) (Created page with "" the theological perspectives of tithing in Numbers and Deuteronomy. Numbers presented the tithe as the wages for the cult personnel, while Deuteronomy expanded the beneficia...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

" the theological perspectives of tithing in Numbers and Deuteronomy. Numbers presented the tithe as the wages for the cult personnel, while Deuteronomy expanded the beneficiaries to include, the Levites, the foreigners, the orphans and the widows. The Israelites were to tithe as a means of expressing worship to the LORD and obedience to the laws. Both books presented the tithe as a theological obligation on the worshipper." WELFARE The triennial tithe provision in chapter 14:28-29 is remarkable. It is one of the best expressions of Deuteronomy’s aim to create a society in which no one would be permanently disadvantaged, or consigned to a second-class status. Deuteronomy is otherwise realistic about the likely persistence of poverty (“since there will never cease to be some in need on the earth…” Deut 15:11), even as Jesus remarked in Mark 14:7 (“For you always have the poor with you…”). Here, the basic idea is not just ‘charity’, but the conferring of worth, dignity and belonging. Israel as paradigm for just societies is nowhere more powerful than here (cf. McConville 2002:254). The inclusion of the ‘foreigner’ is surprising, in the context of a rationale that derives from Israel’s holiness. The two appearances of the ‘foreigner’ in the tithe texts (cf. 26:12-13) make an interesting contrast; he is excluded from the dietary requirements, yet included in the provision for those without property (cf. van Houten 1991: 82). It is one of the points at which Deuteronomy’s strict focus on Israel as the chosen people shows a propensity to give way to a more inclusive logic. As suggested previously, it is not entirely clear what was meant by the triennial tithe Most likely, what normally went to the Lord at the central sanctuary (Deut 14:22-27) was to go to the needy, including the Levites, every third year (Deut 14:28-29). One would still be giving to God by giving to God’s people (cf. Matt 10:42; 25:40), so the significance of the tithe as tribute was in no wise diminished. This understanding is reinforced by the reference to the tithe in 26:13 as “the sacred portion”, a term that suggests its exclusive ownership by the Lord (cf. Lev 5:15-16; 19:24; 27:28). Furthermore, the offerer was to say, “I have removed from my house the sacred portion.” Merrill (1994:270) suggested that the verb (רַעָבּ) referring here in this cultic context to the presentation to the Lord of consecrated things that belong to the LORD, means “to exterminate,” that is, to totally separate what is God’s from one’s house so that it might be given to others. In Deuteronomy 26:12-15, the ordinance concerning the third-year tithe is related to the ceremony of covenant renewal at the Feast of Firstfruits (vv 1-11), both by subject matter and juxtaposition. It mandated the setting aside of the tithe of the harvest of every third year for the purpose of meeting the material needs of the dependent of Israel including the Levite, the foreigner, the orphan, and the widow (v. 12). This was to reiterate the idea that the benevolence of God’s people was to operate in two dimensions, the vertical and the horizontal. Thus the offering of firstfruits to the Lord (26:1-11) could not be separated from the beneficence to be shown to fellow kingdom-citizens (vv. 12-15).

Let it be remarked here that the Levites were not by definition poor; neither were widows, orphans or foreigners. Deuteronomy did not use any word for ‘poor’ in its laws relating to these classes. The aim of the law was to provide an alternative means of access to Israel’s wealth, in the absence of their control of land. They may not have had access, by their own right, to the court system either (cf. 10:18). So, this law is not, properly speaking, a ‘welfare’ provision; it rather ensured that these groups within society could participate fully in Israel’s enjoyment of Yahweh’s blessing, which is their entitlement as members of the holy people (cf. McConville 2002:252). In his view, Wright (1996:271) posited that the two explicit references to the Levites and foreigners (26:11-13) showed that the socially and economically deprived were not to be excluded either from the spiritual blessings of covenant worship or from the material blessings of covenant obedience. Thus, giving to the needy was not only a sacred duty to God, but it also was the defining point for any claim to have kept the law. The law is kept only if the poor are cared for. This shows the essential thrust of Old Testament ethics – that love for the neighbour is the practical expression of any claimed love for God. It also shows how the enacted love for the poor and needy is the practical proof of genuine, God-honouring love for the neighbour (cf. Wright 1996:272).


So, the Deuteronomic tithe was related to three major functions: (i) to support the sanctuary feasts – 14:22-26; (ii) to support the Levites -14:27; and (iii) to support the less- privileged in the society which included the resident alien, the orphan and the widow – 14:28, 29.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44138319_Theological_perspectives_on_tithing_in_the_Old_Testament_and_their_implications_for_believing_communities_in_Africa

https://www.borntowin.net/articles/second-and-third-tithes/

https://www.holisticpolitics.org/GodsWelfareSystem/Tithes.php