Template:Tithing

The predominant free form of government throughout history has been based on 10s, 100s, 1000s. Free governments are supported only by freewill offerings of the people through a local communion of charitable services and benefits provided by a network of volunteer public servants.

To Tithe or Not to Tithe

The debate about tithing or not is usually argued with little understanding of it and its purpose.

What we think of as a tithe among early Israel has little to do with the vain self-serving excuse for a tithing to false religion of Modern Churches today. ™

Tithing had a purpose and a function in society which which was essential for the health and well-being of the individuals and the families that compose their nation.

Part of the misunderstanding is because people do not understand the role of Levites who were the Church in the Wilderness. The Levites provided essential public services to the community.

These same service had been provided by the altars of Abraham.

Those altars of Clay and Stone were never intended to piles of dead stone upon which to burn up the dead bodies of animals. They were, from the beginning, meant to be lively stones providing the benefits of pure Religion through freewill offerings rather the tribute to the men who call themselves benefactors but exercise authority one over the other.

The Levites were called out to avoid the error of the Golden calf by creating the social bonds a free and moral society.

The Levites were given freewill offerings by the people but only "According to their service" to provide for the needy of society by way of charity. That was Religion.

To force the offerings of the people was the error of Balaam, and the covetous practices of the Nicolaitan that makes the word of God to none effect, making the people merchandise and returning the masses to the bondage of Egypt.

Because people do not understand the ancient text confusion reigns and people are unable to see the similarities within the Early Church and that [[church in the

wilderness]] before the foolishnees and corruption of kings. 

Understanding the purpose of the Tithe in society may resolve that debate, but only to likely raise another.

The People's Unit

A tithing or tything as a congregation of families was an historic English legal, administrative or territorial unit, originally one tenth of a hundred, and later a subdivision of a manor or civil parish.

This term tithing originated around the 10th century, when a tithing meant a group of ten adult males (over the age of 12), each of whom were responsible for the other members' actions and behavior in a system of frith-borh or "peace-pledge." This mutual pledge bound the ten men to gather into a loose body or team that shared responsibilities and duties to each other and to the rest of society.

While this gathering of ten men or Elders of families stems back to ancient times, the frith-borh or Frankpledge was required by King Canute II the Great of Denmark and England (d. 1035). Traditionally this ten-man group, referred to as a teothung or tything, i.e. "assembly of ten men," bore actual legal responsibility for the actions of others when charged with a crime or violation of rights.

Prior to the rise of kings and other forms of centralized governments, the tithing was bound by charity and honor as a brotherhood of respect, virtue and personal allegiance or faith. They date back to the most ancient of times, even prior to the ten family congregations of Moses and the tithing of Abraham to Melchizedek and Abraham's own societal altars.

Voluntary Tax

Giving a tenth was a well known and practiced discipline before and after Jacob and Moses and the Levites.

The custom of tithing predated Moses. Abraham tithed to "the righteous king of peace" after he had left Haran and his Father's house.

Jacob promises to give a tenth to God in Genesis 28.

"And this stone, which I have set [for] a pillar, shall be God’s house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee." (Genesis 28:22)

The principle of giving a share of what you produce to God has been around throughout history:

"Honor the LORD with thy substance, and with the firstfruits of all thine increase:" (Proverbs 3:9)

But giving to God is not practical and he does not need what you have.

The word tithing came from the Hebrew word ‘asar [rse], meaning ten. It is identical to other Hebrew words which mean rich or wealth.

It did not actually mean "ten percent," but it was derived from the fact that a congregation of Israelites consisted of ten families. The idea that people would gather in groups of ten families is a form of self government.

Honor Thy Father

To honor thy father and mother as we are directed in the Ten Commandments was meant to provide that “thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.” The tithe was originally a voluntary contribution granted by the eldest Father of a family unit, and given to a minister of his choosing. It was given to support men who provided an important element to a structured and healthy society. If this gifting was properly done, the union and discipline of the whole community was strengthened. The bonds of society were maintained by the virtue of its people. Survival in the face of disaster and calamity was assured by that virtue.

An elder in a community was often a grandfather, or even great grandfather, as head of a large family group. It was usually this individual who was responsible for a tithe to a minister as the head of what counted as one family. This family group gathered with others in practical groups of ten. This pattern was common amongst governments of the people, by the people and for the people. It was one of the most common patterns of free government throughout history. It is not a centralized government of control, but it is common and natural networks of mutual charity. "[O]ur modern reliance on government to make law and establish order is not the historical norm.” Tithing in early Israel was an essential part of providing support in a national government structure that held the people together with nothing more than natural bonds of faith and charity with an element of hope.

The right of a father to the labor of his sons was a natural procreational right as the giver of life. From this foundational right, a “father” or Patri received these pecuniary resources given by way of his sons and grandsons. By this, a father is helped and supported in his leadership role, and typically, a father could contribute a part of these resources as his tithe to support his elected minister.

This right of patrimony was passed down from father to son, from generation to generation upon the death of the natural father. It was also possible to transfer that right. Patrimonialism as a form of government was drawn from the family structures. Patrimonial monarchies and similar forms of government, where an elected official acted as the father of a nation, all originated from this idea of a father's natural right of authority over his children.

From the Latin and Greek word for father we produce words like patrimony as, “an estate inherited from one's father or ancestor” or a patriot, “a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion.”

The practice of the leaders and rulers of government being called “father” was common in the days of Augustus, Tiberius, and Jesus. The Emperor was called Patronus and Senators called Patres (father) or Conscripti Patres, the Conscripted Fathers.

“Excise (tribute), in its origin, is the patrimonial right of emperors and kings.”

National Tithe

The tithing in early Israel, was merely the result of natural need of society to care for one another. This fundamental idea of support and honor within the family was expanded to a local community and then to a national level through a network of volunteer ministers serving congregations of people.

The family unit, instituted by the God of creation, was the building block of society and the pattern from which it sprang. The father of each family was the only king anyone would have to answer to, unless they entered into covenants with other men who sought to rule over others -- like Cain, Lemech, or Nimrod.

The unmarried sons and daughters served the family under the benevolent leadership of their father. They not only honored their father and mother, but also their grandfathers, so that he would have the resources to sustain the whole family and support the community through charity. This was both a natural and divine mandate.

“Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.” (Exodus 20:12)

“Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.” (Leviticus 19:18)

“Honor thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” (Matthew 19:19)

The word honour is from a Hebrew word that means heavy, make heavy or abundant. When sons were married, they left their Fathers house, but they continued to give support and increase to their father and even their grandfathers. These contributions were not called "tithing," but were honorariums of respect to their father, love for their family, and they were received as a matter of right. Those funds were used to strengthen and prosper the whole family, and they could be shared with neighbors.

These granted gratuities were utilized as a common fund. This domestic arrangement functioned like a family bank. It was made available as an emergency resource based on natural bonds of love and caring. It was commonly managed by the eldest son in each family, who, being first born, held the role of priest within that family unit. The eldest father acted as the family king or overseer. The family unit could easily include dozens of individual families and span several generations.

No man proclaimed himself Sui Juris, "in possession of his full rights," or, as the Greeks would say Rhomaios, as long as his natural father was alive. If a son wanted to marry, he asked his father for permission, and though he gained a certain independence when he married, he still remained under the coverture of the family, through that father. Regarding any problems that arose in a family, such as a disease, death or injury, the first call for assistance was to the husband’s family.

For thousands of years, the family had been the foundation of all social insurance. It was a bond of both love and mutual caring. But, what if the family broke down under the weight of some familial tragedy, societal upheaval, wars, or earthly catastrophe?

“All government without the consent of the governed is the very definition of slavery!” —Jonathon Swift

In all forms of governments, some resources are given for the mutual aid of the people, much like a family. Those who manage those pecuniary assets of society are sometimes called priests or administrators. All governments depend on delegated powers which originate from the individual. If a family does not delegate authority by some form of consent, there is no legitimate governmental authority beyond the natural right of self protection.

“What is mine cannot be taken away without consent.”

It is the individual choices that gives birth to governments that can exercise authority. The powers of government may grow by additional application, delegation, or by acquiescence. Even government's power to tax is by consent, although the point and bond of that consent may vary.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...”

The Character of Society

All governments take on the character of their creator, which is the society from which they are formed. Society is “an organized group of persons associated together for religious, benevolent, cultural, scientific, political, patriotic, or other purposes.... a body of individuals living as members of a community; community.” Societies can be divided into two types, based on their character, and their character is based on their virtue as a people, or lack of it. Society will take one of two roads in the formation of its government.

In one type of society or government, their administers and leaders compel the offerings of the people. They may choose their administers and leaders, but once chosen, administers and leaders make rules for the people. This type of government may take many forms, but it is not a truly free government because the liberty of choice is turned over to an individual or group who makes rules and laws for the people, imposing duties and obligations upon them. They may be autocratic or democratic, but the power of choice, whether in the hands of a single ruler or the collective, is no longer in the hands of the individual who was endowed with that original right of choice.

A free government operates only by what is freely given, and the daily liberty of choice remains with the people, within their families. In a free government, the right to choose to whom, how much, where, and when the contributions to society will be made remains with the individual members of society. Society is bound by relationships, not by covenants, contract or even constitutions.

That responsibility of governing ourselves, when exercised diligently by the people, strengthens the virtuous bonds of society. If we want better people to make a better world, then we will have to begin where people are made in the family.”

In both forms of governments, the contributions of the people have a purpose. The means and process by which the government is sustained will shape and mold or alter the people and that purpose. In a less than free government, the people may have some say in this operation, but usually, once the power of individual choice shifts or is centralized, a battle begins between those benefactors who exercise authority and the people who had previously been at liberty.

Cain, Lamech, Nimrod, Pharaoh, Caesar and Herod all established a system of forced contribution through a social compact that bound the families of the people under obligations and limited their choices. Enoch, Noah, Abraham and Moses pursued a government based on free families and free will offerings. In the former, the state became the father of a collective society and government, while the latter remained righteous in their generations.

Tributary and Society

It was over these two form of government that the conflict arose concerning the Gospel of the kingdom preached by John and Jesus Christ and taught by the early Church. Both systems have men who were entrusted with the responsibility of managing these contributions of, for, and by the people of society. These administrators went by many names, including kings, priests, and even “gods” of that government. This was the path or way followed by the Hasmonians, Pharisees and Sadducees of Judea at the time of Christ, and it continued to bring people under tribute.

Tribute is, “A sum of money paid by an inferior sovereign or state to a superior potentate, to secure the friendship or protection of the latter.” In Israel, the head of every family was sovereign, and there was no king. When the voice of the people decided to elect someone who could rule over them, it was called a rejection of God. By 1 Samuel 13:13, God's prophet is calling Saul foolish for compelling tribute from the people.

“Tribute, in its origin, is the patrimonial right of emperors and kings.”

The Emperors of Rome were called Patronus meaning “Our Father” to whom the citizens prayed for benefits like their free daily bread and circuses. But these applications for benefits at the expense of their neighbor was a snare and a trap which bound the people.

"Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap." (Psalms 69:22)

"And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:" (Romans 11:9)

“How doth the city sit solitary, [that was] full of people! [how] is she become as a widow! she [that was] great among the nations, [and] princess among the provinces, [how] is she become tributary!” (Lam 1:1)

Saying that the city has become “tributary”means the people are forced to serve the government, giving the value of their labor. If the people are forced to work or give the value of their labor to their government, it was called “tribute, or corvée”. These systems of involving “involuntary, unpaid labour, or other service, for' superior power-a feudal lord, a king” represent governments mentioned in the Bible as wicked or oppressive, but they come about because of the covetous people who create them.

This is only where the people have asked a government authority to be responsible for their welfare. In the systems of society where there is no social compact, the responsibility of the eldest son as priest within the family remains untouched. The family remains whole and free. The community leaders are volunteers, and the compensation they receive is only by freewill offering.

In Egypt, they used a corvée system where they had to pay 20% of what they earned to the government, because they had applied for benefits. They were under tribute. God never wanted them to go back to that Egyptian government type.

This is how Moses set up the government of God. The community contributed to those volunteer titular leaders according to their services and the assistance they provide. These volunteer ministers of society were the first born of a national network of a peculiar people. These ministers, called priests, had a purpose. It was to facilitate that nation in remaining a strong, efficient, and flexible body without diminishing any freedom or liberty which originates within the family.

In a free government, all power remains with the people, and it depends on voluntary leaderships and support with mutual compliance. Each family freely assembled and chose someone to lead them in virtuous service to each other and their neighbors. These volunteer leaders, serving the true needs of the people, also gathered in congregations. Those leaders received freewill offering of the people according to what was right in their own eyes. Services and provisions were distributed through systems of charity and hope.

Types of Tithes

"Tithe" meant a "tenth" in the Hebrew and in other languages.

The Levitical, or sacred tithe

"And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, [even] the service of the tabernacle of the congregation." (Numbers 18:21)

AyinShinReish is the number ten but it you put a Mem in front of it which has to do with something flowing it becomes a tithe. The phrase "all the tenth" is all the tithe or the flow of the tenth or does it mean all which flows from the tens.

Does that mean the Levite shall get a tenth of all produced by all whom he serves or that he should get what charitably flows from each of ten families according to his service?

"And Hezekiah appointed the courses of the priests and the Levites after their courses, every man according to his service, the priests and Levites for burnt offerings and for peace offerings, to minister, and to give thanks, and to praise in the gates of the tents of the LORD." (2 Chronicles 31:2)

What does it mean according to his service?

"Take [it] of them, that they may be to do the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; and thou shalt give them unto the Levites, to every man according to his service." (Numbers 7:5)

So the critical thing is offerings that are given to God's servants according to their service. If they are not doing a good job, you may not give them a full ten percent. You may still give that amount, but you may bless the ones doing the work, rather than give to those who simply have the position and offer no help. The power is in the hands of the people to keep their public servants honest.

So what course did their service take? What were their duties? Who were these priests and porters? What was "their courses at every gate"? What was their charge and how did they minister?

"And he appointed, according to the order of David his father, the courses of the priests to their service, and the Levites to their charges, to praise and minister before the priests, as the duty of every day required: the porters also by their courses at every gate: for so had David the man of God commanded." (2 Chronicles 8:14)

There were three major types of tithe, but they were all for a purpose.

The tithe financed the service of the ministers who were not there just to tickle the ears of the people or make them feel righteous.

One tithe was called maaser rishon. It was given to the Levite, who in turn tithed to someone called a priest.

The tithe of the feasts

A second tithe was identified as "maaser sheni," and it was to be consumed in the gates. I have seen it written that it was to support an elaborate feast in Jerusalem around the Temple.

Many scholars say that the second tithe was taken to Jerusalem during the three pilgrim festivals of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. But there was no centralized Jerusalem nor stone temple until later. Besides, Jerusalem is the Hebrew word for double peace, and Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles had a particular social and governmental purpose within this free society. This second type of tithing was instituted before the Israelites inhabited the land of Canaan, long before Jerusalem; it supported the original designs of the feasts.

The tithe for the poor

The third tithe was the maaser ani. It was an additional tithe for the general poor, including the strangers, widows and orphans.

They were to eat and be satisfied. I am not so sure how satisfied you can be, if you only eat once every three years. Taking care of the widows and orphans was the mission of Pure Religion. This was the Daily ministration the Greek Jews spoke of when the Church appointed by Christ first started to function after Pentecost.

Besides tithes, there were also peace offerings, and atonement or sin offerings. Burning these things up was a metaphor like casting bread on the waters. All of this giving was to help you learn the practice of giving, which is the way of God. God is the first who ever gave, and tithing leads you to follow in His footsteps. These freewill offerings or charity fostered love and honor. God was the first to foster love and honor. These offerings created unbreakable bonds within society, according to the character of Christ and the righteousness of God.

What is Right

“In those days [there was] no king in Israel, [but] every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes.” (Judges 17:6)

We often hear preachers referring to this time without a central government or a king, and they say it was a wicked time. Of course wickedness did occur, but the Bible indicates the real rejection of God is when they chose a ruler who began to exercise authority (in the days when there was a king in Israel); that was a wicked time.

Every man doing what is right in his own eyes works fine amongst virtuous people. This is why Jesus said to seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness, because only righteous people can sustain a free government by faith, hope, charity and the perfect law of liberty.

All societies must pay tribute in support of their government. Most governments compel the tribute of the people, which is called tax, but in Israel they supported their government with Freewill offerings which included a sacrifice called Corban. Christ preached about this all the time, and he talked about the wicked servant who forced those under him to pay what they should pay freely. Paul talked about governments instituted by men who rejected God and gave to leaders their God given right, their original power to choose. That grant of power by the people to the fathers of the earth and Benefactors who exercised authority allowed them to impose harsh tribute, and allowing benefactors to take and take and take from the people, which is the punishment of those wicked people who rejected The Way of God through their Covetous Practices.

The Unjust Steward

And then there was the unjust steward who was commended because he forgave debt and only took what the people said they could afford voluntarily. Applying these parables to the policies of modern public servants and the people who look to them and empower them, many do not meet with Christ's standards and will be counted amongst the wicked.

One of the most common shifts in society is to move from a free society where everyone has the right to choose to be responsible or not, to a society that thinks it has a right to force people to contribute.

We see this with Cain, Lamech, Nimrod and others. In the case of Abraham, he parted from the ways of Ur, and then even from his own father, Terah, who established the city of Haran, because Abraham was looking for a better way to live than these city states provided. Abraham was found paying directly to the eldest patriarch of his family group. To abandon father and mother would have been considered wrong, even before the Ten Commandments. Abraham gave up his right to rule and govern his family's estate, which was given to his brother Nahor, and he returned to the ways of the Father in heaven.

“These [are] the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man [and] perfect in his generations, [and] Noah walked with God.” (Genesis 6:9)

Inheritance of a family passes down from generation to generation. This includes the promises of God. If the people go out of the presence of God, and if they covenant with other gods of the world, they lose that which was passed down.

“Thy kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion [endureth] throughout all generations.” (Psalms 145:13)

Sons and daughters had to be manumitted from the natural authority of the father and mother or abandon them as Cain did. When the family remained free and loyal to the ways of God, they were righteous in their generations. Those sons and daughters who gave up their God-given rights and appointed men to be their fathers on earth often created governments that were not based on righteousness, and they did contrary to the ways of God the Father who art in heaven. These systems would eventually eat out their substance, but they often began with consent.

Before Rome established emperors, society was already moving from a free republic with systems of charity binding the people and an all-volunteer army supported by contributions. The more the people look to the government, the more reason it had to expand its power with less and less opposition.

"The real destroyers of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits." —Plutarch

The right of governments to tax was tied to the right of a father’s authority over his children. As that power increased, it became the right of a master over his subjects. We have heard of the free bread and circuses of Rome that fed the apathy of the mob and seduced the people into moral decay. Like over-indulgent fathers, the Roman emperors led their children into corruption and iniquity, or they merely appeased their subjects but kept their power over them.

The subjugation of the people under this new father was a three-part process which began with Novation . It included birth registration, since age was so important when someone became eligible for benefits. Certification was essential to assure that benefits only went to the faithful children of these elected “fathers.” Roman certification of birth was around in the days of Augustus, but it was made mandatory by Marcus Aurelius. Those records were kept in the bureau of vital statistics, Temple of Saturn.

The granted benefits were called Tutor. Someone who received provisions was being 'raised up' in the second part of the process toward subjugation, and this process was completed with the manumission of a child from their parents to their conscripted father, the State, at which time they began to contribute to the State as an adult. This contribution was called Qorban in Rome, Corban in Judea or Korban elsewhere. It means your sacrifice, your contribution, for the needy of society. The Corban which had once been freely given to the ministers of a voluntary government became the official contributions on the civil altars of the State, where penalties were imposed by the State if the full amount was not paid.

One way was considered commendable by Christ, and the other was considered wicked, and it made the word of God to none effect.

Consent was required to conscript these new "Fathers upon the Earth," but consent was no longer required once you were bound under the Patronus of the State.

“He is not presumed to consent who obeys the orders of his father or his master.”

There was guaranteed a system of social insurance and entitlements offered by government, but not without the price of their freedom and the sacrifice of choice.

If, “A person shall not be allowed to enrich himself unjustly at the expense of another,” then it should also be true that any bounties, donations, or benefits, that are not owed but accepted, will create an obligation to the benefactor on the part of the recipient.

Schemes of government

Those schemes of government were implemented in places like the city States from Cain to Caesar. In Herod's reign, and even though John the Baptist opposed Herod's system by encouraging people to repent and build bonds of love between their neighbors, yet Herod's State, like all of those similar schemes, took on the role of father. And, within the jurisdiction of those civil States, there was a form of social security but, as always, such protection drew subjection. These systems were also a breeding ground for jealousy, envy, avarice and sloth. These systems of venality might be established by application and membership, but they were maintained by force. Although, the leaders were called Benefactors, they exercised authority one over the other. In order to guarantee full benefits, they resorted to forcing the contributions of the people who became citizens subject to the administration of governments to whom they had applied for benefits, and now the citizens became dependent.

To desire these benefits, one was, in fact, coveting their neighbor's goods. When people gathered together in those city-states, they soon found increasing demands from the men in authority, and the central treasuries were being depleted by corruption and self-serving abuse. Men who sought to exercise power were drawn to those offices of power like a moth to a flame.

When natural and human resources ran low in that nation, or when the subject population rebelled against the increase in taxes or corruption or decline in conditions, excuses were made to plunder neighboring peoples or nations in order to maintain their standard of living. They were accustomed to coveting and using force, and the beast in their cultivated fallen natures easily justified aggression against more distant or different neighbors upon, what was often, the flimsiest of excuses.

There were numerous methods employed to maintain these civil structures. The wealth was centralized, and sometimes gold and silver was taken out of the hands of the people. Education was controlled, and eventually everything was regulated from speech to prices.

Melchizedek

This national and mutual oppression of a subjected but covetous population made it necessary for neighboring free families and groups of families to also gather together for common defense from what often came as an aggressive threat. We see an example of this with Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, who was gathered with other rulers like himself in the days of Melchizedek. They conquered one city state after another, and anyone else they came upon in the process also became their servants.

They conquered Sodom with impunity;they took who and what they wanted. But there was another element on the earth in those days. There was Abraham and his altars of stone. Those stones were not dead rocks, but living men of peace and charity. Those altars were composed of men who sought to serve the people, yet they did not exercise power and authority over them. These people had formed not a civil state of subject members, but they formed a freewill network of charity, hope and faith.

That network saw to the needs of any who fell on hard times. Sometimes disaster struck a particular family or a local area, and people needed to get help from a larger group, or from farther away.

Chedorlaomer was a disaster on the move, and Abraham’s altars were the cure. Overnight, he mustered an all-volunteer army that destroyed this ravenous beast and freed the people it had taken. One of the greatest logistical problems of an army is its supply lines. Napoleon said that an army moves on its stomach, and it was no different for Abraham.

"And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he [was] the priest of the most high God." (Genesis 14:18)

Abraham and his instant army of volunteer minutemen received supplies from this Melchizedek. Evidently, Abraham had been tithing directly to this Melchizedek since he had left his father’s house. Was Melchizedek one of Abraham’s grandfathers?

Abraham had set up a way in which people could remain free yet have a reason to come together when there was almost any kind of trouble. These altars could take care of local problems within small groups of families, but they were linked by a network of ministers to handle even much larger issues. Flood, famine or war could be dealt with efficiently if the spirit of faith, hope and charity was cultivated on a daily basis.

When one of these City-States began to exercise authority upon their neighbors, the people could come together like minutemen to the rescue. The illustration of Abraham’s defeat of Chedorlaomer is a perfect example, but certainly it was not the only example in history.

Abraham was offered a reward for his services, but he would not touch even a thread of the spoils from Sodom after saving the people of that civil State, along with many others. Sodom and other city States operated like Ur and Haran, which was much different than Melchizedek or Abraham. One operated in righteousness and freedom under God with the power and responsibility in the hands of the individual people, and the other operated by subjection and forced contributions. Once you became a member entitled to the protection of the State, your liberty declined.

Tithing in Israel was for the Levites, but the tithing was not mandated by law. It was a voluntary system, and it was only given according to the service of the Levites. Levites did not have a guaranteed individual salary. It was a tenth of a families' produce, because each Levite served ten families. It was full time work, because he was a major part of the government - serving the needs of the people in congregation, such as higher education, health, welfare of widows, orphans, the poor, emergency funds, social insurance etc.

These same congregations of ten families supplied the voluntary militia in time of military conflict. In whatever platoon you served in time of war, it was along side the same brothers, cousins and neighbors with whom you grew up. The fighting dedication of the soldiers was enhanced by these personal bonds.

The whole tithe was for the Levite and his family who served together as a single unit, as it was their only wage for the services supplied. This made it in the best interest of the Levite to see that families prospered, which meant long-lasting marriages, no adultery, and good education for obedient, upright sons and daughters. A healthy functional family meant a healthy functioning nation.

The Levites were not paupers or mendicant monks, but they belonged to God. They were joint heirs holding all things in common. They had lands they held as a body politic, just like the early ministers of the Church appointed by Christ. They did not belong to the World.

Things like forgiveness and thanksgiving were essential to keep these congregations together and thriving. Patience, charity, mutual love and caring were not just a good idea or some moral code, but they were essential to the survival of the individual, the family, the congregation and the nation.

A TITHING, in English law. Formerly a district containing ten men with their families. In each tithing there was a tithing man whose duty it was to keep the peace, as a constable now is bound to do. St. Armand, in his, Historical Essay on the Legislative Power of England, p. 70, expresses, an opinion that the tithing was composed not of ten common families, but of ten families of lords of a manor.

The tithing in Israel was not "ten percent" from each individual, but a share given by the ten families. Ten family groups gathered together to form a congregation which tithed to their ministers. Many family groups consisted of several families, with one elder or eldest father at the head of a family group. Only the eldest father was Sui Juris. He was Lord of the family, and to him was given all honor due to the father of the family. These fathers gathered in a group of ten families, and they chose the princes and ministers of the ten families. The honor given to the chosen minister of such a congregation was given by each of the ten elders of those families.

Justin and the Early Church

The early Christians lived in the world but not of it. They still took their day of rest on the Sabbath, but we also see them meeting on the first work day of the week. For what purpose?

In Justin's, First Apology, we see an explanation of the government of the Christians with the words, “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place... And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and, in a word, takes care of all who are in need.”

---

"Justin explain the Christian practice of Pure Religion which creates the social bonds of true "Christian fellowship". He explained how it differed from the "legal charity" of the Roman State."

---

Justin had written the Emperor Antonius Pius, “And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost.”

The Romans and many other countries had systems of social welfare, but to the Christians, those were the Nicolaitan and the deeds of their altars God hated.

"But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate." (Rev 2:6)

The Romans persecuted many of the early Christians because they would not take oaths of allegiance, nor serve, by contributing to the “gods” of Rome. These gods required donations, or tribute, in the form of an excise tax. A small book, or “libellus, made of papyrus” was used as a passport throughout their world. It identified you as a contributing member and contained your signature --- and was believed to be the mark of the beast in its time. These temples administered systems of social security, education, justice, and national defense. They even operated as a world bank.

"And those who have among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost."

The most important thing to remember is that the tithe was at the discretion of the people. They chose who would be their minister from a pool of men who qualified to be what became known as a Levite. What their service was worth was decided by the people they served. They only tithed ‘according to his service’ as the Bible tells us. Ten Levites also tithed to the ministers they picked, and this eventually supplied those who took care of the tabernacle which moved from tribe to tribe. This system of voluntarism managed to keep the kingdom of God one people in charity under the perfect law of liberty. It was never meant to be the superstitious centralization of power we see at the time of Christ's birth.

These Levites were not performing some bizarre or mindless ritual of killing and burning up animals so that God would be pleased with the smell of the smoke. Such fabrications resulting from a misinterpretation of the language, and deceptive sophistry, has led to felonious fables and absurd speculations by religionists over the centuries.

The Levites were the "first born" of the nation of God with a practical purpose, duties and functions. They were not the priests of the individual families, but the priests or first born of a nation. They formed a free people without the privation, incorporation or abridgment of God-given rights and responsibilities. Congregations were linked throughout the nation of God by love and charity. They did not take funds from the family unless that family chose to give those funds as freewill offerings. There was no minister of God forcing contributions from the people by exercising authority. Freedom under God is devoid of such practices and policies, and Christ forbade it.

"And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth. Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;" (Luke 22:25)

There is of course some social pressure from those within a local congregation and communities of congregations, and this would be pressure to pay your fare share. We are to rebuke one another when slothful, but there was no compelled offering for the Kingdom of God except by God's will written in our hearts and minds.

Later, Israel began to compel the contributions as they did in the cities that Cain and Nimrod built, and like Sodom and Pharaoh’s Egypt.

This was a clear violation of the Law of God because it was a matter of coveting your neighbors goods, and such systems led to usurious title to property; they were leading away from commodity money into other systems of usury. This soon became the unrighteous Mammon.

Jesus freed

Jesus freed us from the statutes the Pharisees, but he did not free us from the Ten Commandments or the precepts of God. He clearly instructed us to follow the Ten Commandments and shunned the idea that you can call him Lord and not do what he told you to do.

“And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?” (Luk 6:46)

There are some people who think they see no need for ministers of Christ's gospel under the perfect law of liberty or they see no value in supporting ministers. But then most ministers do not understand the duties and mission of ministers who earned the tithe by actual and practical service to the congregation and the nation. People who think we have no need for ministers probably have chosen the administrators of the gentiles as their administrators. The services once rendered by these ministers of sacrifice and service have been replaced by the authoritarian benefactors of modern civil bureaucracy.

"But Jesus called them [unto him], and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:" (Matthew 20:25-27)

I have actually had ministers of modern Churches tell me that this only pertains to Church government. They actually believe that on the other six days a week, it is absolutely okay for Christians to be like the governments of the gentiles, coveting and Biting one another. They are content to depend on those administrators who obtain the tithes and contributions of the people by force, rather than the freewill offerings of the people spoken of by Moses, Jesus and the apostles. They seem to enjoy the government of the gentiles who exercise authority, wallowing in its ill-gotten benefits, like the pig in the mire.

“But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.” (2 Peter 2:22)

They even take part in such authority by choosing covetously to increase their benefits at the expense of their neighbor. Even though God, Moses or Jesus never said to do anything like that and often said quite the opposite.

"But Jesus called them [to him], and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: And whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all." (Mark 10:42)

Those people have chosen to come together in a common purse of rights and wealth, which of course, as we know, runs towards death. They are tempted to seek the benefits of another man's sweat and blood and they find themselves snared in their own trap. We covetously think our neighbor should be a source for our desired benefit, and then we become human resources for the will of these tempting rulers.

Such systems of exercising authority where 51 percent of the voice of people can take away the goods of their neighbor's household and convert them to satisfy their own desires are a rejection of the spirit and ways of God in Heaven. They also rob the people of their free will choice of charity and love, to say nothing of coveting their goods. This is why Jesus forbade such behavior for those who followed him, no matter how good are the benefits from such systems. That is simply not the Christian way, but the way of the anti-Christ. The end does not justify the means, and those who feel justified in this Nicolaitian way which is hated by God are void of the salvation of Christ.

"And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve." (Luke 22:25-26)

Of course, most people professing to be Christians or followers of Christ are operating under a strong delusion, having believed the lie that the kingdom of heaven is not at hand. They have been taught a watered down gospel, devoid of the kingdom and the message of Christ.

The kingdom of Heaven is within you, but if that is a true statement, then by the very nature of God’s kingdom within and your belief in Jesus as Lord, you will do as Jesus said. If you really love Jesus, you will find it very difficult to covet your neighbor's goods or desire the benefits offered by men who exercise authority in the taking from your neighbor to supply those offered benefits.

The question was asked, “Should we tithe to the modern Church?”

Well, I would not call it a tithe. It is really just a cover charge for entertainment. People go to Church to feel good and to be reassured by the men and women working in those church buildings that they are saved and that God loves them even though they do not do the will of the Father.

If those ministers are not preaching the kingdom is at hand, and if they are not taking care of the widows and orphans, nor any of those things that use to be a part of the first century Church or the Church in the wilderness, then why support them?

I heard a minister say we don’t have to do that any more, because the government does that for us. Christ preached the government of charity, and John preached the same message; they did not inspire anyone in the use of force like the governments of the world.

The fact that the Roman government did the exact same thing people are doing today, for anyone who would apply to the Roman government, seems to have escaped this minister's education entirely. Christians would not apply or participate, and that is why they were persecuted.

Those Pharisees, in what John called the Synagogue of Satan, did the same thing, offering entitlements under a system of Corban condemned by Jesus. It seems to have made little impression on anyone that at baptism, Christians were cast out of such systems. Christians would not apply or ‘pray’ to such institutions because those systems did not rely on charity or love. They made the Law of God to no effect. Those systems were the opposite of what Christ was teaching. Eventually those institutions persecuted the Christians who would not participate, apply or make offerings on their civic altars.

It astounds me that people can pretend they are Christians and do just the opposite of what Christ said and what the first century Church was doing.

Standing

"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." (2 Timothy 3:5)

Israel was literally the Kingdom of God on earth. Of course at first the kingship was in the hands of the patriarch of each family represented titularly by the appointed elders of individual tribes through a process of mutual consensus of the individual people. Some 3,000 years ago, Moses managed this society of about three million people, and he was led to organize them by establishing captains of ten families and captains of ten captains, etc..

"That the princes of Israel, heads of the house of their fathers, who [were] the princes of the tribes, and were over them that were numbered, offered:" (Numbers 7:2)

The word 'over' is from amad translated stood 171 times and stand 137, and is almost never translated over in more than 500 appearances. Amad means to stand, remain, endure, take one's stand. The word does not really mean 'over' as a king or a ruling general might be over his subjects, but more in the way of enduring, standing or endorsing an office of service, respect and duty.

The word numbered is from paqad which means to attend to, muster, number, reckon, visit, punish, appoint, look after, care for. And again this same pattern of tens and ministers was seen repeated in the early Church, as represented with 120 families present by name, with twelve apostles appointed in service.

"And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)" (Acts 1:15)

One-hundred and twenty families and twelve ministers appointed by Christ. The pattern is repeated in lands all over the world for the next 1000 years.

“To that field the head of each family led his sons and kinsfolk; every ten families (or tything) were united under their own chosen captain. Every ten of these tythings had, again, some loftier chief, dear to the populace in peace; and so on the holy circle spread from household, hamlet, town,--till, all combined, as one county under one Earl, the warriors fought under the eyes of their own kinsfolk, friends, neighbours, chosen chiefs! What wonder that they were brave?”

In the first millennium after the Apostles preached the kingdom of heaven, the Anglo-Saxon form of government had something called a Tithingman who oversaw ten families composed of freemen, a Hundredman [or gerefa - in Saxon language, it became reeve] who oversaw ten Tithingmen, and an Eoldorman who was overseer to a thousand families, known as a Shire. A tithing in English Law was formerly a district containing ten men with their families. The key to their success was the intimate consensus of each group.

Most of the ministration of justice was through these men by the mutual consent and aid of the people. The prime responsibility for bringing offenders to justice still remained with the victim and their family, but through these men and the customary law, an organized structure to assist the Hue and Cry of the people was established. In the case of more national calamities or needs, this network could immediately muster a well-regulated army of thousands. They were the minutemen of the national militia that functioned all across Europe for the first millennium.

As Jesus came preaching the kingdom of heaven, there were a few things he was going to do:

• “Ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.” (Leviticus 25:10)

• "Therefore say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." (Matthew 21:43)

• “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” (Luke 12:32)

Under the Perfect law of liberty, each father was the head of a household, and by the nature of that fact, he was an elder of his family group. When the apostles appointed elders, they were not granting the office of elder, they were appointing elders to the office of minister. Those ministers were chosen by the people. This system continued even after Constantine ordered everyone in Milan to become Christian. There the people picked one bishop for the whole city. That bishop began to exercise authority and appoint those who ruled the Church, and in conjunction with the kings of the gentiles, began to issue “edicts and commands.” These, of course, were not true Christians, but manufactured or instant Christians with more fear of Constantine than love of Jesus. The system that grew out of this departure from the “Way of the Lord” was contrary to the wishes and words of Jesus Christ.

Before 600 AD, the Anglo Saxons had formed a government with these Tithingmen who oversaw the needs of ten families. With the Eoldorman and Hundredsmen, a thousand families known as a Shire could work as a large body. One key to these successful societies was that no person was responsible for communicating directly with more than 10 people to notify the whole nation, and each man was free to choose the Tithingman of his choice, and each Tithingman in small intimate groups of ten chose their Hundred man etc..

These were not men of power and authority, but men of service and support. They were a key part of the viability of a system based on liberty. Their function was to serve the people, and in order to do that, they knew they must keep the people in a family-type group, bound by genuine concern and love. The charity managed by the Church through this same network of tens cemented these bonds. The practice of charity was a daily ritual. These tithing ministers tended to the needs of the individual families.

This was a system of bottom up authority, as opposed to top down dictation. These ministers, although they formed a national government, did not make laws for the people, except within their own families. The authority of the Hundreds man and the Eolderman was titular, not sovereign.

Not only did the people choose their tithingmen who would serve them as a sort of a ministering public servant, but they also chose what to pay them. The Bible speaks about picking your tithe as in

“And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, [even] of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD.” (Leviticus 27:32)

Some want to turn this idea into a dogmatic rule, but the truth is that God is simply expressing the idea or precept that you should be fair and unbiased in the distribution and compensation.

Many ranchers supply free beef to their hired help. Most are generous with this allotment, but I have known some to fish through a freezer full of prime cuts in order to find tough and unwanted portions of a cow to give to the man who worked all day in the fields. In the same manner, one aspect of the Levite minister's job was to receive the free will temple contribution in the national treasury. These funds were handled by the porters or gatekeepers of the temple. They were allowed a portion of this contribution to support their needs. They could cut off a piece of the sacrifice for their own use. It was to be a fair share, but often it was cut much thicker than normal. This thick piece eventually evolved into what became known as a porters share, and this brought about word usage like Porterhouse Trust or a Porterhouse Steak.

Just as they were to be fair in payment for his service, so also was the minister to be fair in the division of his services. He and his whole family were to serve ten families. The minister had no right to compel a salary by force of arms or law. How could he? The right hand of government remained in the hands of the people. The people retained their rights under the perfect law of liberty, which included the right to choose who and how much they would tithe. There was no enforcement of the tithe, as there is with modern taxes in governments that exercise authority.

“For the pastors are become brutish, and have not sought the LORD: therefore they shall not prosper, and all their flocks shall be scattered.” (Jeremiah 10:21)

The Old Testament mentions the Nedabah or nadab almost 50 times, which is a freewill offering or voluntary offering. The precepts of God are unchanging. It just amazes me that Modern Christian churches have the audacity to demand a tithe while they have delivered the people back into the bondage of Egypt.

“The wind shall eat up all thy pastors, and thy lovers shall go into captivity: surely then shalt thou be ashamed and confounded for all thy wickedness.” (Jeremiah 22:22)

The Modern Christians apply to gentile-type governments to get those benefits and become subject to more taxes than were paid in Egypt. Once they apply, they will have to pay Caesar, but if the Churches were really Churches, they would not have to or want to apply. You would only be applying to God.

“Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD.” (Jeremiah 23:1)

But the people are all back in a worse condition than Egypt. They are all a surety for a debt.

“He that is surety for a stranger shall smart [for it]: and he that hateth suretiship is sure.” (Proverbs 11:15)

Just like the Bible says they have returned to the mire. Men with great swelling words have tempted the people and made merchandise of them through their covetous desire for such ill gotten benefits.

"And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.... For when they speak great swelling [words] of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, [through much] wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error." (2 Peter 2:3...)

"For all these things do the nations of the world seek after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things. But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these things shall be added unto you. Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom." (Luke 12:30...)

"These [words] spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue." (John 9:22)

The word 'agreed' is from suntithemai.

Those who got baptized by the ministers of Christ's ekklesia, His Church, no longer could claim benefits of the baptism of Herod through his Corban at the temple by their own covenant. Jesus already explained that that Corban made the word of God to none effect. You could not believe in Jesus and look to that Corban for your protection. So what Corban made the word of God to an effect?

That was the Corban of Christ. Followers of Christ who believed in Him were put out of the system of the temple. These synagogues of Judean Persons were just like the system of Corban managed by administrations today.

If you actually believe in Christ, you would do what He said and obey the will of the Father in Heaven and not seek to serve the Fathers of the World.

Congregations must come together and establish the living stones of His Altars and be the Corban of Christ through a profession of faith. To say you pick a minister is not passing the buck; it is a commitment to be the flesh of the altar. It is a confession that you are seeking the kingdom of God and His righteousness. But it will be up to those people freely assembled to do just that. People are just hearing the gospel; they must unlearn the false gospel taught by the modern Church, which is that all you have to do is believe in Christ, but after that, get your daily bread from the temples of Herod and the Fathers of Rome. Unlearn that, and instead learn about the righteousness of God in His kingdom.

You would think that people on this network would start to connect the dots. How can you practice the Corban of Christ without congregations of record and without the elected ministers of record? How can we provide an alternative system if people do not contribute to building that system of Corban dependent on living altars of stone. How can you serve God and do justly without offering your flesh and the fruits of your toil in a system of congregations intended for supplying help when there is a hue and cry?

"Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him." (John 9:35-38)

Worship means he paid homage to Him because he was King. How many kings can you have?

"And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth." (John 9:39-41)

They should begin to see that believing in Christ as King meant believing His kingdom was at hand, and they should understand that to start serving that king, it is by being His government of service to each other (being His hands and His feet). A minister without a congregation that supports it is like scattered Dry Bones.

"So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone." (Ezekiel 37:7)