Tithing

[Vort]

I think arguing about tithing is counterproductive. But it might be illuminating if people answered this simple question:

You do a job for someone who pays you $100. You still have to buy food, pay rent, electricity, taxes, and so forth, but the person does in fact pay you $100 (or £60, if you prefer).

How much tithing do you pay?

[Latter Days Guy]

Actually, a prophet or apostle is justified to provide clarifying statements regarding scripture, especially the First Presidency of the Church.

So who is right then? The First Presidency who said no one is justified in making any other statement, or the one saying otherwise?

[Latter Days Guy]

You verified that how? Did you talk to "the people"?

By going to a relevant source from that particular time which then gave the commonly held definition of that particular word.

[Leah]

This is the full text from the 1828 Websters dictonary about interest:

IN'TEREST, v.t. [L. inter and esse.]

1. To concern; to affect; to excite emotion or passion, usually in favor,but sometimes against a person or thing. A narration of suffering interests us in favor of the sufferer. We are interested in the story or in the fate of the sufferer. We are interested to know the result, issue or event of an enterprise. It is followed by in or for. We are interested in the narration,but for the sufferer.

2. To give a share in. Christ, by his atonement, has interested believers in the blessings of the covenant of grace.

3. To have a share.

We are not all interested in the public funds, but we are all interested in the happiness of a free government.

4. To engage; as, to interest one in our favor.

To interest one's self, is to take a share or concern in.

Clearly the above is not relevant to the issue of tithing.

IN'TEREST, n. Concern; advantage; good; as private interest; public interest.

Divisions hinder the common interest and public good.

1. Influence over others. They had now lost their interest at court.

He knew his interest sufficient to procure the office.

2. Share; portion; part; participation in value. He has parted with his interest in the stocks. He has an interest in a manufactory of cotton goods.

3. Regard to private profit.

'Tis interest calls off all her sneaking train.

4. Premium paid for the use of money; the profit per cent derived from money lent, or property used by another person, or from debts remaining unpaid. Commercial states have a legal rate of interest. Debts on book bear an interest after the expiration of the credit. Courts allow interest in many cases where it is not stipulated. A higher rate of interest than that which the law allows, is called usury.

Simple interest is that which arises from the principal sum only.

Compound interest is that which arises from the principal with the interest added; interest on interest.

The above is about commerce and the charging of a levy on money loaned, so again has no releavance to tithes.

5. Any surplus advantage.

With all speed,

you shall have your desire with interest.

So the only relevant piece of the text is the one above which talks about surplus advantage, so what is surplus advantage?

Again Websters comes to our aid:

SUR'PLUS, n. [L. id.,more.]

1. Overplus; that which remains when use is satisfied; excess beyond what is prescribed or wanted. In the United States, the surplus of wheat and rye not required for consumption or exportation, is distilled.

2. In law, the residuum of an estate, after the debts and legacies are paid.

So we can see at the time that the law of tithing was given, the people understood the use of the word interest to mean that which remains, is in excess of what is needed, the remains after the debts and legacies are paid.

How does an entry from a generic dictionary prove that Church members understood it to be this way? All the above proves is what was in that particualr dictionary that year.

Look at this thread. You "understand" the law of tithing totally differently to anyone else.

So...again...where is your source that confirms that that is how members of the church understood and practiced it?

When someone has reached a conclusion to support what they have already decided on, it's pretty easy to go out and find some random fact to "prove" their conclusion. The church does not tell us to tithe on our "overplus". Please show me where it does.

[Guest]

No you said you had $100 of which you spent $10 on a spade, hence the $90 remaining. I have already said that I believe that everything including our income comes from the Lord. I also believe that what the Lord provides he does so to sustain us and our families and that he wouldn't place a burden upon us that we could not bear.

Yes, and I also said you paid $9 in tithes. So, if you really want to nitpick, then the story would be that when you loaned out $90, it is assumed you took $9 from money you already had long time ago to add to your $81 to loan to your friend...

Yes, he does not place a burden upon us that we could not bear. So, if you can't pay your rent after tithing, it's time to move to a cheaper place, not skimp on tithing to pay rent. You can bear living in a cheaper place. Basically, if you can't afford to offer a tenth of your earnings to God, something in your life is not going well and you'll need to hit the pause button and analyze your situation to see where the adjustment needs to happen. God gave the commandment to tithe. So, it must follow that you can bear giving honest tithes.

Edited February 21, 2014 by anatess

[Leah]

By going to a relevant source from that particular time which then gave the commonly held definition of that particular word.

This explanation does not support your claim.

A definition from a generic dictionary does not prove that that is what the Church's teaching is, nor does it show that that is what church members understood at the time. (Indeed, it contains no references to the church whatsoever).

Even if it did, which it does not, as others have pointed out - the Church has clarified the stand on tithing. Please provide documentation of the current teaching that we are only to tithe our "overplus" and not our income.

[Leah]

So who is right then? The First Presidency who said no one is justified in making any other statement, or the one saying otherwise?

Do you really not understand the statement made by the First Presidency or are you just being obstinate?

It baffles me that you appear to be claiming that the Prophet cannot make a clarifying statement, while at the same time YOU are attempting to "make a statement" that is contrary to the Church's clear and current instructions on tithing.

[Latter Days Guy]

This explanation does not support your claim.

A definition from a generic dictionary does not prove that that is what the Church's teaching is, nor does it show that that is what church members understood at the time. (Indeed, it contains no references to the church whatsoever).

Even if it did, which it does not, as others have pointed out - the Church has clarified the stand on tithing. Please provide documentation of the current teaching that we are only to tithe our "overplus" and not our income.

No it shows what people of that particular time believed a particular words meaning was. Yes the church clarified that we are to pay tithes on our increase which is understood to mean income. Back in the day they paid tithes in kind, at the end of each year they had their tithing settlement and paid their tithes from their interest, why because how could you know what your interest was unless you had already met your outgoings first?

what is the increase of our income? It is that which is left over after our outgoings, our surplus.

[Latter Days Guy]

Do you really not understand the statement made by the First Presidency or are you just being obstinate?

It baffles me that you appear to be claiming that the Prophet cannot make a clarifying statement, while at the same time YOU are attempting to "make a statement" that is contrary to the Church's clear and current instructions on tithing.

No, I'm quoting a statement from the first presidency which states no one can make any other statement than the one that they have made:

For your guidance in this matter, please be advised that we have uniformly replied that the simplest statement we know of is that statement of the Lord himself that the members of the Church should pay one-tenth of all their interest annually, which is understood to mean income. No one is justified in making any other statement than this. We feel that every member of the Church should be entitled to make his own decision as to what he thinks he owes the Lord, and to make payment accordingly.

What I have done is look at the passage in D&C 119, looked up the definition of what the meaning of the word interest was at the time the passage was written so I could understand the context of the language used, took that knowledge and then went to the Lord for confirmation of what tithes I should pay. As the statement above says:

We feel that every member of the Church should be entitled to make his own decision as to what he thinks he owes the Lord, and to make payment accordingly.

[Latter Days Guy]

How does an entry from a generic dictionary prove that Church members understood it to be this way? All the above proves is what was in that particualr dictionary that year.

It proves what was the meaning of the word at that particular time in history was, what the people who said it at that time meant by it and how it was used.

Look at this thread. You "understand" the law of tithing totally differently to anyone else.

As those from back in the 1830's would say the same to those today.

So...again...where is your source that confirms that that is how members of the church understood and practiced it?

When someone has reached a conclusion to support what they have already decided on, it's pretty easy to go out and find some random fact to "prove" their conclusion. The church does not tell us to tithe on our "overplus". Please show me where it does.

No the church tells us to tithe on our interest and as I have shown interest at the time of the writing of the passage of D&C 119 meant surplus/overplus.

[Guest]

I think they mean interests, so I'll start paying out 10% of my sheet music and mp3's and books, and DH can start paying out 10% of his Warhammer stuff.

[Anddenex]

So who is right then? The First Presidency who said no one is justified in making any other statement, or the one saying otherwise?

Amos 3:7 is right, and so is the First Presidency who said "no one is justified" speaking with regard to the Saints who don't have stwardship.

If the Lord wants to clarify his doctrine, who would he speak through? The First Presidency and the Counsel of the Twelve Apostles have, within their stewardship, to clarify doctrine...if not, we would not have some of the chapters of the Doctrine & Covenants which clarify aspects of scripture within the Old Testament.

[pam]

I think arguing about tithing is counterproductive. But it might be illuminating if people answered this simple question:

You do a job for someone who pays you $100. You still have to buy food, pay rent, electricity, taxes, and so forth, but the person does in fact pay you $100 (or £60, if you prefer).

How much tithing do you pay?

You pay $10. That would be 10% of your increase.

[Leah]

No the church tells us to tithe on our interest and as I have shown interest at the time of the writing of the passage of D&C 119 meant surplus/overplus.

You just ignore anything and everything that doesn't fit with your personal wishes, don't you?

So I guess you also promote practicing polygamy and keeping blacks from the priesthood.

[Latter Days Guy]

You just ignore anything and everything that doesn't fit with your personal wishes, don't you?

So I guess you also promote practicing polygamy and keeping blacks from the priesthood.

Fit in with my personal wishes? What personal wishes are those? What has polygamy and keeping blacks from the priesthood got to do with tithing?

[notquiteperfect]

To look at this another way - I find it baffling that someone would go to church every week and enjoy the electricity, ac/heat, etc and would feel fine not contributing to help pay for the bill regardless of what 'definition' they found to support their crazy opinion.

[Maureen]

Is it better to force people to tithe the most through guilt and judgement or is it better to let people cheerfully give what they can?

M.

[Guest]

The problem is, a lot of people read these forums, whether they reply or not. We need to be sure that we're putting out the right information and not giving people false doctrine.

[notquiteperfect]

Is it better to force people to tithe the most through guilt and judgement or is it better to let people cheerfully give what they can?

M.

Force - no. Teach *correct* principles and let them govern themselves - yes.

[McLainDow]

If one wants to take something that a few people on a website say and consider it the final gospel word and not do the work needed to get a proper answer then there isn't much that can be done about that.

[Guest]

Hopefully we get more people pointing them in the right direction than not, though.

[Maureen]

Force - no. Teach *correct* principles and let them govern themselves - yes.

OK then; let's say you know of a family that is not governing themselves in the way you think they should in relation to these "correct principles", then what?

M.

[bytebear]

OK then; let's say you know of a family that is not governing themselves in the way you think they should in relation to these "correct principles", then what?

M.

it's none of your business unless you have stewardship over them (i.e. Bishop). Even as a Home Teacher, you are to encourage, but you cannot judge them. But even a bishop of one ward cannot dictate the actions against a member of another ward. In other words, it's not your call to make.

[Guest]

OK then; let's say you know of a family that is not governing themselves in the way you think they should in relation to these "correct principles", then what?

M.

You do what my 10-year-old did to his cousin.... He told her, "Just in case nobody told you, smoking is bad for you." And he went his merry way. His cousin continued puffing on her cigarette, of course... But at least she couldn't claim ignorance anymore.

[Latter Days Guy]

To look at this another way - I find it baffling that someone would go to church every week and enjoy the electricity, ac/heat, etc and would feel fine not contributing to help pay for the bill regardless of what 'definition' they found to support their crazy opinion.

In what way am I not contributing? And how is it crazy? Because I don't agree with what you say is correct therefore I'm holding a crazy opinion. How is that complying with the statement of the church? Seems like you judging where you have no right to.