Giving in the New Testament

Giving, freedom, and the danger of binding consciences.

Paul wrote more about money than any other apostle. He pleaded with the Corinthians across two letters, organized a relief collection for Jerusalem, held up Macedonian generosity as a model, and defended the principle of pastoral support with sustained argument. The man was not shy about asking for resources.

What he never did was reach for Malachi.

When Paul wanted people to give generously, he reached for Christ. "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich."^[1] That is his appeal. The generosity of God made visible in His Son.

The distinction matters. If the apostles commanded a 10% tithe, we should obey it. If they did not, we should not preach it as though they did. Adding weight where Christ did not place it is not faithfulness. It is something else.

What the Apostles Say

When Paul instructs the Corinthians on giving, his language is deliberate.

"Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come."^[2]

"As God hath prospered him." Proportional giving, not a fixed percentage. It rises and falls with circumstances. It assumes that God's provision differs from person to person, and that the gift should reflect that difference.

Then Paul goes further:

"Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver."^[3]

Paul rules out two categories of giving: grudging and necessity. These are not rhetorical flourishes. They are the precise words he uses.

If a believer, like Abraham or Jacob, freely purposes in his heart to set aside a tenth from what God has provided, that gift can be beautifully consistent with the apostles’ instructions. Tithing itself is not unbiblical, wrong, or legalistic.

But consider what Paul's instructions mean for a common kind of tithing sermon:

If a preacher says, "Give ten percent, or else you rob God and live under a curse," how does that fit under “not of necessity”?

The New Testament does not lower the bar for generosity. It reframes the appeal entirely. Cheerful generosity is not driven by the threat of a curse. It rises from the heart of a believer who has tasted grace and wants grace to flow through his hands.

Grace Loosens the Grip of Greed

Paul held up the Macedonian churches as his model of genuine generosity. They were in "deep poverty." They gave "to their power," and even "beyond their power." They did it "willing of themselves."^[4]

That is not bare-minimum religion. That is grace doing what law cannot: loosening a person's grip on what they think they need.

Paul adds:

"For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not."^[5]

First, a willing mind. If there be first a willing mind, it is accepted.

The gift is measured by what a person has, not by what he does not have.

A single mother overwhelmed by rent and groceries is not measured by the same capacity as a man buying his third vacation home. God sees the gift. He also sees the burden.

The pattern Paul describes is not a flat percentage applied equally to unlike situations. He calls it "equality":

"But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality."^[6]

Abundance supplies want. That is the apostolic pattern: willing, proportional, grace-born generosity flowing toward need.

Cheerful is not the same as casual. A willing gift can still cost something. The Macedonians prove that. But it does not need fear to pry open the hand.

Gospel Workers Should Be Supported, But Levites Were Not Reinstated

The question will come: if tithing is not commanded, how will pastors be supported?

It is a fair concern, and the New Testament answers it without the Mosaic tithe.

Paul writes:

"Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel."^[7]

Faithful gospel laborers should be materially supported. Paul proves the principle by appealing to priests sustained through temple service. But this does not require importing the Old-Covenant tithe any more than it requires rebuilding the temple.

He also says:

"Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine."^[8]

Whether ministers should be supported is settled. They should. The question is whether Paul reissued the Mosaic tithe as the required funding mechanism.

He did not.

He draws a principle from the Old Testament without rebuilding the whole system it belonged to. Levites had no land inheritance; pastors are not Levites. Temple offerings supported temple service; the local church is not the temple storehouse. The principle remains: support those who labor in the gospel. The tithe law does not travel with it.

If the New Testament clearly teaches that gospel workers should be supported, why must we bind that support to “tithing” unless the apostles do?

Scripture consistently handles Old Covenant institutions this way. Circumcision points to the circumcision of the heart. Passover points to Christ. The temple points to greater realities fulfilled in Him and His people. These things teach us without continuing unchanged. Paul can draw wisdom from the temple without putting Christians back under the temple system.

The Poor Were Not a Side Ministry

New Testament giving does not stop with pastors, missionaries, and teachers.

The first believers in Jerusalem were marked by radical care for one another. They sold possessions and goods so that no one lacked what was needed.^[9] The giving was voluntary, Spirit-born, and came from people whose grip on earthly goods had been loosened by the resurrection.

Paul charged those with means to be "rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate."^[10] Open-handed language. He warned the wealthy not to trust in uncertain riches but in the living God, "who giveth us richly all things to enjoy."^[11] The instruction is not "hit your percentage and relax." It is deeper: put your hope in God, and let your resources follow.

He preserved for the Ephesian elders the words of Christ: "It is more blessed to give than to receive."^[12] The world says getting is blessed. Jesus says giving is. He does not need a curse to make that beautiful.

Acts 15 Had the Perfect Chance, and Did Not

Acts 15 rarely receives the attention it deserves in this conversation.

The church was forced to answer a direct question: must Gentile believers keep the Law of Moses? The pressure point was circumcision, but the larger issue was the yoke of the Law itself. Peter said:

"Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?"^[13]

The apostles gave Gentile believers instructions. They did not command the Sabbath. They did not command the feasts. They did not command the tithe. They wrote:

"For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things…"^[14]

No greater burden.

If the tithe was meant to bind Gentile churches as a standing command, Acts 15 was the natural place to say so. The question on the table was the Law. The apostles answered it deliberately and carefully. The tithe is absent from their answer.

The apostles' silence here is not neutral. It is a loud absence.

May and Must Are Not the Same Word

If the New Testament writers meant to bind Christians to a 10% rule for giving, why is there not a clear apostolic command to that effect?

Someone will call this an argument from silence.

The problem is not silence. The problem is building a command where God has not spoken.

Christians may give 10% of their income. Christians may give more. Christians may use a fixed proportion as a personal giving discipline. Nothing here forbids a believer from giving a percentage "as he purposeth in his heart." He may freely do so, willingly.

"May" is not "must," though. Wisdom is not law. A helpful practice is not a divine command.

If a 10% tithe from Christian income is binding on the church, we should be able to show where the apostles bind it.

Not infer it from Abraham.
Not imply it from Malachi.
Show it in the text.

Because the New Testament repeatedly teaches giving, commands generosity, warns against greed, and tells believers to care for the poor and support gospel workers. It never once commands a 10% tithe from wages, income, or increase. It allows such giving freely. It never commands it universally.

To give 10% willingly and cheerfully, as you purpose in your heart, can be faithful Christian giving. To treat that percentage as the necessary standard for everyone is another matter entirely. When a recommendation becomes a burden and a burden becomes a threat, freedom and grace get buried.

Not all at once.
Just one “God requires this” at a time.

The Better Question

The tithe asks, "Did you give the tenth?"
Grace asks, "Does Christ have your heart?"

Those are not the same question, and they do not produce the same kind of giver. The tithe question can be answered by a calculator. The grace question requires a conscience shaped by the gospel and submitted to the Spirit.

That is what the apostles were after: willing, proportional, cheerful, sacrificial giving, motivated by grace, directed by need, held accountable to love rather than law. The apostolic pattern is not smaller than the tithe. It is more demanding, because it cannot be satisfied by hitting a predetermined number.

The proof-texts that we use to demand otherwise deserve a careful look.

UP NEXT:
Do the common proof-texts command a tithe? (Part 4)

FOOTNOTES: