Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after all

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Locked
freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by freedomforall »

SamFisher wrote:Brethren and Sistren, I beseech you, do not pay tithing on gross income (pre-tax). You pay it on your increase--after taxes but before voluntary withholding. Also pay it on tax returns.

You never see your taxes. They are taken by force. Tax rates change. Would you pay tithing on gross income if you were in an 80% tax bracket? What do you do if you live in China, Cuba, Russia? God knows that governments aren't playing fair.
This was also one of my excuses, and learned a big lesson and went to gross.

User avatar
Provision
captain of 100
Posts: 277

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Provision »

freedomforall wrote:
Provision wrote:Have you even read page one of this thread?
Malachi is talking to the LEADERS.

Now, try again and find me one, single, scripture.

Don't quote me prophetic opinion.

I want a scripture.
The outcome from reading the first several posts is nothing but a huge sob story by those that want excuses for not paying on their gross. I know, I've been there. I've probably used every excuse known to man, but after many years I came to realize that I was only going in circles. Once I decided to pay 10% on gross, my life changed for the better.

Are you even a Mormon?

You preach that we can buy blessings.

What a fools message.

Not for me. I'll stick with scripture and doctrine thank you

User avatar
Provision
captain of 100
Posts: 277

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Provision »

You embarrassed yourself with that nonsense reply a few back to.

Still can't give me a scripture that says we will be blessed for paying tithing.

Seriously, take the tail from between your legs and go away where they are happy to have people spread false doctrine

dman
captain of 100
Posts: 116

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by dman »

Provision wrote:You embarrassed yourself with that nonsense reply a few back to.

Still can't give me a scripture that says we will be blessed for paying tithing.

Seriously, take the tail from between your legs and go away where they are happy to have people spread false doctrine
Freedom listed Malachi 3 which clearly talks about the blessings of tithing. He is not the one spreading false doctrine.

dman
captain of 100
Posts: 116

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by dman »

Provision wrote:Have you even read page one of this thread?
Malachi is talking to the LEADERS.

Now, try again and find me one, single, scripture.

Don't quote me prophetic opinion.

I want a scripture.
I don't know if I would rely 100% on Aussies interpretation of who Malachi is speaking about. I don't see that Aussie referenced anything, it was just his personal opinion.

I find the interpretation lacking to a large degree. Here is where I see the problem. Aussie claims the leaders were keeping tithing for themselves and the Lord is persuading them to bring the money in the storehouse. If they did the Lord would pour out a blessing to them? This is like saying the deacon who picks up your fast offering will receive the greater blessing if he takes the money to the bishop than you who actually wrote the check? This interpretation makes no sense to me.

User avatar
Matthew.B
captain of 100
Posts: 877
Location: Syracuse, New York

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Matthew.B »

Historical context shows that, during the days of Malchi's prophesying, the priests did have issues with correctly using tithing.

But when Christ comes and gives that same verse to the Nephites, there's no intimation that he limits his message to the priests who will handle the tithing. In my opinion, the plain, unwrested reading of 3 Nephi 24 promises blessings to those who will faithfully pay their tithing, as well as the priests who will faithfully use that tithing to help for the poor and needy.

Claiming there's no blessings promised for paying tithing is egregiously unscriptural. If a church tithes the way that God intended, the poor and needy will be taken care of, the rich will be blessed because they're helping to take care of the poor, and the whole community will feel its way towards living the law of consecration and Zion.

So there are blessings promised for paying tithing faithfully with an eye towards keeping the commandments of God.

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Lizzy60 »

I agree, MatthewB, that both the tithe-payer, and those who decide how the tithes are spent, will be blessed when they do the will of God. However, if a person asks God, and receives the answer that the tithes are not being used in the way God would have them used, is it possible that God would ask that person to bypass the middleman, and give their tithe directly to whomever God tells them to give it to? Several people on this forum have stated that when they have asked God who to help, He has been very specific in who He would have them assist. Miracles can happen if we let God into our hearts, and we cease being afraid of the "arm of the flesh." And yes, it can be very intimidating to go against the most ingrained practices of our Mormon Culture, even when we know we are doing what God asks us, specifically, to do.

User avatar
Matthew.B
captain of 100
Posts: 877
Location: Syracuse, New York

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Matthew.B »

Lizzy60 wrote:... is it possible that God would ask that person to bypass the middleman...
I originally had this really snarky, sarcastic post written out highlighting the scriptural fallacies employed by those who don't want to believe this kind of middleman-bypassing is possible.

But I didn't think that was the best response, so I'll just say "yes, it's possible". However, dispensational laws are given for the good of the people who call themselves the people of the Lord, and as tithing is a standing law forever to the Church, a person would first have to learn to live the principle of paying tithing to the Church before they could go to the next step and receive a commandment directly from the Lord about paying a form of tithing directly to somebody else. IMO.

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Lizzy60 »

Dang -- I think I would have laughed at your snarky sarcastic post. Too bad you deleted.....
The persons with whom I am most familiar, who have been asked by God to pay their tithes directly to those who He has indicated, paid tithing to the institution, on gross, for 40 years. I also believe that not all will receive the same answer, if they ask God about their personal situation. He knows our hearts, and He knows what we will do. He is unfailingly merciful.

User avatar
Matthew.B
captain of 100
Posts: 877
Location: Syracuse, New York

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Matthew.B »

Lizzy60 wrote:Dang -- I think I would have laughed at your snarky sarcastic post. Too bad you deleted.....
The persons with whom I am most familiar, who have been asked by God to pay their tithes directly to those who He has indicated, paid tithing to the institution, on gross, for 40 years. I also believe that not all will receive the same answer, if they ask God about their personal situation. He knows our hearts, and He knows what we will do. He is unfailingly merciful.
Agreed. :)

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by freedomforall »

Provision wrote:
freedomforall wrote:
Provision wrote:Have you even read page one of this thread?
Malachi is talking to the LEADERS.

Now, try again and find me one, single, scripture.

Don't quote me prophetic opinion.

I want a scripture.
The outcome from reading the first several posts is nothing but a huge sob story by those that want excuses for not paying on their gross. I know, I've been there. I've probably used every excuse known to man, but after many years I came to realize that I was only going in circles. Once I decided to pay 10% on gross, my life changed for the better.

Are you even a Mormon? Are you AussieOI?

You preach that we can buy blessings. This is a blatant lie. I gave you Mal 3:8. This is what you say is a lie. You got your facts mixed up. I even gave you talks on the subject by church leaders, and you say I preach buying blessings. =))

What a fools message.

Not for me. I'll stick with scripture and doctrine thank you
Yea, only the ones you select...but God has spoken nonetheless. You discard one and select another, that's really going by scripture, isn't it. By discarding Mal, you are not going by scripture, and this is fact.
Would you know a fools message if it slapped you on the butt? You're just like some other posters that kick against the pricks for a cause...to see who can cry the loudest. You have to use slander, name calling and whatever else thinking that helps your cause. Well, it doesn't. That is a fools game.
I expressed how I was caught up in either paying no tithing and paying on the net, to paying on the gross thru things I learned, and prayer and blessings and a change of heart, and I'm the fool? =))
Last edited by freedomforall on February 18th, 2014, 10:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by freedomforall »

Provision wrote:You embarrassed yourself with that nonsense reply a few back to.

Still can't give me a scripture that says we will be blessed for paying tithing.

Seriously, take the tail from between your legs and go away where they are happy to have people spread false doctrine
No I embarrassed you, there's a difference. I gave you scripture that you refuse to believe and apparently consider as false doctrine. This ought to embarrass you.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by freedomforall »

dman wrote:
Provision wrote:You embarrassed yourself with that nonsense reply a few back to.

Still can't give me a scripture that says we will be blessed for paying tithing.

Seriously, take the tail from between your legs and go away where they are happy to have people spread false doctrine
Freedom listed Malachi 3 which clearly talks about the blessings of tithing. He is not the one spreading false doctrine.
Thank you dman. I appreciate it.

jon123
Hi, I'm new.
Posts: 2

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by jon123 »

My issue is this: I feel that tithing is not "just"/not the same sacrifice to all members under the 10% of gross method.

I am in college, and have contemplated being either a high school teacher or becoming a doctor. At first look you may think the two have nothing in common. However, both are lives filled with service and helping others. I enjoy teaching and would love to teach and also coach a sports team as well. I am fine with making far less money. However, I am not fine with paying tithing on 10% of my gross. For this reason I have decided to pursue becoming a doctor. I don't agree with how tithing is currently interpreted by most bishops, be this the fault of the Church's leadership or not. Assume I make $35,000 a year as a teacher and have a family of 6 (I plan on 4 children). The government's poverty level is listed around $32,000 for this family size. After paying for basic living expenses, I have $3,000 left over. If I pay tithing on gross, or $3,500, I have nothing left of discretionary income for anything else. I'll actually have $500 less than needed based on the poverty level. Based on paying tithing on excess, I would have no problem paying 10% on my $3,000 excess, or $300. I personally believe tithing should be paid, but on excess, not gross. I don't want to have to deal with explaining myself to every bishop I have and them and fear being called to repentance or think of me poorly/dishonest at the very least, when I feel I am being completely honest to God and complying with the scriptures. However, if I am a specialist physician, and average $300,000 a year, I can easily afford to pay 10% on gross. After taking out $32,000 for living expenses, I still have $268,000 left over for whatever I want. Even though tithing should be $26,800 , I would have no problem paying $30,000. You see, the richer you are, the closer your tithing has no effect on your life and the closer that 10% of discretionary money used for tithing = 10% of gross. For the doctor, paying on gross meant that he paid 11.2% of his discretionary income to tithing. (30,000/268,000). For the poor teacher, he paid over 100% of his discretionary income to tithing. Seems fair, doesn't it? Even if you make $50,000 a year and pay on gross, even though you pay the Church almost 30% of your discretionary income for tithing, you still are left with $13,000 instead of $16,200. There is still plenty left to work with. This is not true for the poor. The very poor are hit the very hardest. The poor get poorer and the rich stay rich. The rich make relatively little sacrifice to pay tithing on gross to be be able to go to the temple vs the poor person making little to nothing. It is truly 10% tithing vs 90% - 100% tithing.

Here is a table that clearly shows the inequity of paying tithing on gross vs paying after bare necessities are met. This is based on a poverty level of $32,000 for a family of 6. The left column shows what is left if tithing is paid on gross. Note how quickly discretionary income drops from 90% to 0%. The right column shows that if tithing is paid on net after bare necessities are met, all income levels get to keep 90% of their discretionary income (10% to the church). Paying on gross only allows the rich to keep 90% of their discretionary income.
Tithing Inequality Spreadsheet Image.jpg
Tithing Inequality Spreadsheet Image.jpg (52.19 KiB) Viewed 2523 times
Now if you got lost in the numbers, here is my favorite example (besides the spreadsheet) that shows how paying 10% on gross in wrong:

A single, unmarried man lives at home with his parents. His gross income is $30,000. His parents pay for all of
his expenses as they want him to save it up for marriage, etc. The poverty level for a single person is $11,490 which doesn't count
in this case has he has no expenses. Everything he earns is excess. If tithing is paid on
gross, he would pay $3,000. If paid on excess, the single man with no expenses and all of his money as EXCESS is tithed at $3,000 and has $27,000 remaining. Contrast that with a family of 11 that also has an income of $30,000. The poverty level for this family is $51,690. The family of 11 is so poor they are not surviving. They are on government assistance and still not surviving. If they paid on gross, they would now have $27,000. They are even poorer! That is -$24,690 below the poverty line! They are in extreme poverty! If they paid tithing on excess, they would pay nothing, as they have no excess and are in extreme need.

Now here is the moral question: Can you honestly say to yourself that Christ, if here, would ask the family of 11 to pay the
same amount of tithing as the single man of 1? They both make the same amount, and so based on gross would both pay 10% or $3,000. However, these 2 groups have vast differences of excess or disposable income and need. Can you honestly believe that He would say these are equal sacrifices before God? Can you say that if paying on gross, rich people make the same sacrifice to be able to say they are full tithe payers to get a temple recommend as compared with the poor people? I could never believe that God or His Son would be so unjust to have both groups pay the same amount for tithing.

A person becomes a school teacher and has great sacrifice keeping his family afloat and in paying gross tithing, whereas another becomes a doctor and has no sacrifice keeping his family afloat and no sacrifice in paying tithing except for in his heart.

And most members are oblivious to this great injustice.

User avatar
Jason
Master of Puppets
Posts: 18296

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by Jason »

Tithing is a test of faith. The Lord can bless and make up for whatever inequalities may exist....but one has to have the faith.
By this principle (tithing) the loyalty of the people of this Church shall be put to the test. By this principle it shall be known who is for the kingdom of God and who is against it. By this principle it shall be seen whose hearts are set on doing the will of God and keeping His commandments, thereby sanctifying the land of Zion unto God, and who are opposed to this principle and have cut themselves off from the blessings of Zion. There is a great deal of importance connected with this principle, for by it it shall be known whether we are faithful or unfaithful.
President Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p. 225.

hyloglyph
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1043

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by hyloglyph »

jon123 wrote:My issue is this: I feel that tithing is not "just"/not the same sacrifice to all members under the 10% of gross method.

I am in college, and have contemplated being either a high school teacher or becoming a doctor. At first look you may think the two have nothing in common. However, both are lives filled with service and helping others. I enjoy teaching and would love to teach and also coach a sports team as well. I am fine with making far less money. However, I am not fine with paying tithing on 10% of my gross. For this reason I have decided to pursue becoming a doctor. I don't agree with how tithing is currently interpreted by most bishops, be this the fault of the Church's leadership or not. Assume I make $35,000 a year as a teacher and have a family of 6 (I plan on 4 children). The government's poverty level is listed around $32,000 for this family size. After paying for basic living expenses, I have $3,000 left over. If I pay tithing on gross, or $3,500, I have nothing left of discretionary income for anything else. I'll actually have $500 less than needed based on the poverty level. Based on paying tithing on excess, I would have no problem paying 10% on my $3,000 excess, or $300. I personally believe tithing should be paid, but on excess, not gross. I don't want to have to deal with explaining myself to every bishop I have and them and fear being called to repentance or think of me poorly/dishonest at the very least, when I feel I am being completely honest to God and complying with the scriptures. However, if I am a specialist physician, and average $300,000 a year, I can easily afford to pay 10% on gross. After taking out $32,000 for living expenses, I still have $268,000 left over for whatever I want. Even though tithing should be $26,800 , I would have no problem paying $30,000. You see, the richer you are, the closer your tithing has no effect on your life and the closer that 10% of discretionary money used for tithing = 10% of gross. For the doctor, paying on gross meant that he paid 11.2% of his discretionary income to tithing. (30,000/268,000). For the poor teacher, he paid over 100% of his discretionary income to tithing. Seems fair, doesn't it? Even if you make $50,000 a year and pay on gross, even though you pay the Church almost 30% of your discretionary income for tithing, you still are left with $13,000 instead of $16,200. There is still plenty left to work with. This is not true for the poor. The very poor are hit the very hardest. The poor get poorer and the rich stay rich. The rich make relatively little sacrifice to pay tithing on gross to be be able to go to the temple vs the poor person making little to nothing. It is truly 10% tithing vs 90% - 100% tithing.

Here is a table that clearly shows the inequity of paying tithing on gross vs paying after bare necessities are met. This is based on a poverty level of $32,000 for a family of 6. The left column shows what is left if tithing is paid on gross. Note how quickly discretionary income drops from 90% to 0%. The right column shows that if tithing is paid on net after bare necessities are met, all income levels get to keep 90% of their discretionary income (10% to the church). Paying on gross only allows the rich to keep 90% of their discretionary income.
Tithing Inequality Spreadsheet Image.jpg
Now if you got lost in the numbers, here is my favorite example (besides the spreadsheet) that shows how paying 10% on gross in wrong:

A single, unmarried man lives at home with his parents. His gross income is $30,000. His parents pay for all of
his expenses as they want him to save it up for marriage, etc. The poverty level for a single person is $11,490 which doesn't count
in this case has he has no expenses. Everything he earns is excess. If tithing is paid on
gross, he would pay $3,000. If paid on excess, the single man with no expenses and all of his money as EXCESS is tithed at $3,000 and has $27,000 remaining. Contrast that with a family of 11 that also has an income of $30,000. The poverty level for this family is $51,690. The family of 11 is so poor they are not surviving. They are on government assistance and still not surviving. If they paid on gross, they would now have $27,000. They are even poorer! That is -$24,690 below the poverty line! They are in extreme poverty! If they paid tithing on excess, they would pay nothing, as they have no excess and are in extreme need.

Now here is the moral question: Can you honestly say to yourself that Christ, if here, would ask the family of 11 to pay the
same amount of tithing as the single man of 1? They both make the same amount, and so based on gross would both pay 10% or $3,000. However, these 2 groups have vast differences of excess or disposable income and need. Can you honestly believe that He would say these are equal sacrifices before God? Can you say that if paying on gross, rich people make the same sacrifice to be able to say they are full tithe payers to get a temple recommend as compared with the poor people? I could never believe that God or His Son would be so unjust to have both groups pay the same amount for tithing.

A person becomes a school teacher and has great sacrifice keeping his family afloat and in paying gross tithing, whereas another becomes a doctor and has no sacrifice keeping his family afloat and no sacrifice in paying tithing except for in his heart.

And most members are oblivious to this great injustice.
Outstanding write-up Jon

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by freedomforall »

Mosiah 4:24 (24–25)
24 And again, I say unto the poor, ye who have not and yet have sufficient, that ye remain from day to day; I mean all you who deny the beggar, because ye have not; I would that ye say in your hearts that: I give not because I have not, but if I had I would give.
25 And now, if ye say this in your hearts ye remain guiltless, otherwise ye are condemned; and your condemnation is just for ye covet that which ye have not received.

Can this apply to anyone withholding tithing, in other words, paying as little as possible in attempting to fulfill the the Lord's desire that we pay tithes?

Can a person pay 3% of their income because of being poor, yet be justified if in their heart they say, if I had I would give more?
Is a person justified if they are not poor, yet say they give not because the church asks too much?
Is the paying of tithes an attitude, coupled with obedience, or just obedience no matter what?

User avatar
marc
Disciple of Jesus Christ
Posts: 10354
Contact:

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by marc »

freedomforall wrote:Mosiah 4:24 (24–25)
24 And again, I say unto the poor, ye who have not and yet have sufficient, that ye remain from day to day; I mean all you who deny the beggar, because ye have not; I would that ye say in your hearts that: I give not because I have not, but if I had I would give.
25 And now, if ye say this in your hearts ye remain guiltless, otherwise ye are condemned; and your condemnation is just for ye covet that which ye have not received.

Can this apply to anyone withholding tithing, in other words, paying as little as possible in attempting to fulfill the the Lord's desire that we pay tithes?

Can a person pay 3% of their income because of being poor, yet be justified if in their heart they say, if I had I would give more?
Is a person justified if they are not poor, yet say they give not because the church asks too much?
Is the paying of tithes an attitude, coupled with obedience, or just obedience no matter what?
I personally believe not. Tithes and offerings are two different things. A poor person who earned $1 all day only owes 10 cents to church in tithes. If he has a penny to spare, maybe someone even more poor can benefit from it.

hyloglyph
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1043

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by hyloglyph »

coachmarc wrote:
freedomforall wrote:Mosiah 4:24 (24–25)
24 And again, I say unto the poor, ye who have not and yet have sufficient, that ye remain from day to day; I mean all you who deny the beggar, because ye have not; I would that ye say in your hearts that: I give not because I have not, but if I had I would give.
25 And now, if ye say this in your hearts ye remain guiltless, otherwise ye are condemned; and your condemnation is just for ye covet that which ye have not received.

Can this apply to anyone withholding tithing, in other words, paying as little as possible in attempting to fulfill the the Lord's desire that we pay tithes?

Can a person pay 3% of their income because of being poor, yet be justified if in their heart they say, if I had I would give more?
Is a person justified if they are not poor, yet say they give not because the church asks too much?
Is the paying of tithes an attitude, coupled with obedience, or just obedience no matter what?
I personally believe not. Tithes and offerings are two different things. A poor person who earned $1 all day only owes 10 cents to church in tithes. If he has a penny to spare, maybe someone even more poor can benefit from it.
If he earned $1 all day, wouldn't his profit be eaten up with living expenses, making him owe zero?

User avatar
marc
Disciple of Jesus Christ
Posts: 10354
Contact:

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by marc »

hyloglyph wrote:
coachmarc wrote:
I personally believe not. Tithes and offerings are two different things. A poor person who earned $1 all day only owes 10 cents to church in tithes. If he has a penny to spare, maybe someone even more poor can benefit from it.
If he earned $1 all day, wouldn't his profit be eaten up with living expenses, making him owe zero?
Now we're dealing with variables and hypotheticals. Of course he has living expenses and this is only one day's income. Maybe his expenses were covered the previous month. Who knows. I personally would pay the dime. If 90 cents was pure surplus, and he paid it in offerings or gave it to someone more needy, what a generous offering it would be. I only addressed the question with absolutes. I could only give you my own answer if such variables applied to me.

User avatar
creator
(of the Forum)
Posts: 8242
Location: The Matrix
Contact:

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by creator »

hmm, 31 pages of discussion on tithing plus at least 3 other tithing threads popping up... maybe this should be locked?

User avatar
marc
Disciple of Jesus Christ
Posts: 10354
Contact:

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by marc »

BrianM wrote:hmm, 31 pages of discussion on tithing plus at least 3 other tithing threads popping up... maybe this should be locked?
Or merged. You're the boss, boss.

User avatar
creator
(of the Forum)
Posts: 8242
Location: The Matrix
Contact:

Re: Definition of Tithing in 1838 WAS "surplus" income after

Post by creator »

I'm not sure about merging them mainly because sometimes it's good to see the original post that started the thread, why it was started, what perspective it was written from, etc.

Locked