Skip to main content

More than a Check: Deuteronomy 14

In Summary: Moses carries forward to the list of clean and unclean animals in Deuteronomy 14. This list matters for two purposes. First, the people were not to eat the unclean. Second, they were not to sacrifice the unclean. Studies abound about why certain animals were listed by God as unclean. These range from serious, like the view that pig was forbidden for disease fears, to a little silly, like the view that pork is so delicious it was a risk for idolatry. (Somebody call the Bacon Coalition!)

I find two things worth noting on this list. First is that God provided a specific list, then a qualification list. That allowed the people to deal with any animal that didn't fit the list. Second is that acceptable animals required either attentive care (cattle-types) or hunting effort.

The clean/unclean list follows an instruction to avoid cutting oneself or shaving one’s forehead for the sake of the dead. Guess what? We don’t know exactly what that meant. I would assure you that any idolatrous practice is forbidden, but it is likely broader than that. Perhaps the idea of self-mutilation in memory of another is in view. In all, I think the purpose is that the Israelites were God’s people and should act like it, even in grief.

In Focus: Coming to the end of the chapter, we see commands related to the tithe. This is a touchy subject these days, as some hold that the tithe is an absolutely binding law on the church and others that it is absolutely not. Let us first examine this in context.

First, the tithe is 10%. That’s what the word means, tenth. Suggesting that a tithe was anything else is nonsense. However, there was more than one tithe—so the cost of fulfilling all “tithes” was more than 10%.

Second, the tithe is agricultural. One should note, however, that everyone had an agricultural allotment, so everyone had agriculture to tithe from.

Third, the tithe could be converted from produce/agriculture to money, and then brought in to the worship center.

Fourth, the tithe was to be used for the purpose of worship and fellowship. The Levites were to be “remembered” in the process.

Fifth, every three years a tithe was to be collected and kept in town rather than shipped out. It was to feed the Levites, the widows, the orphans, and the aliens. (ALIENS AGAIN!!)

One thing on this triennial tithe: I’m not as awesome on the grammar as most commentators, but I am almost seeing this as a replacement for the tithe above. That is, 2 years you take it to the center point, then the third year you keep it local. I’m not convinced it’s an additional tithe.

One other thing to remember: the setup of Deuteronomy was for a nation governed through religious practice. Tithes and taxes were aligned. There was nothing done that didn't either come from freewill giving or mandatory sacrifices and tithes.

In Practice: What do we do with this?

We admit that principles for an agricultural economy have to migrate to a monetary one. That tithes were in produce then does not mean that only farmers tithe now—it was about the income from work.

Do we tithe today?

First, no. Because we see God as owning everything, we do not bring Him a tenth and call it good.

Second, yes. Because we see God as owning everything and we ought to bring in worship, showing our respect and commitment to Him.

Nice and confused, right?

Here is the reality as I see it: we are not under the Law. The Law was fulfilled in Christ, so we are not trying to keep it. But we do learn about God through it. We can see that trusting God to make whole what we give away benefits us, spiritually.

We can see that we have responsibilities to provide for those in need and those that teach, and those responsibilities are part of our worshipful life before God. We can also see that the “firstfruits” ought to come. What are the firsts? Some say the best, some say the chronological firsts. I think it’s both—that we keep not the best, and that we trust God by giving among the first of what we receive.

Does that mean we are cursed if our first check is not 10% to a local church? Of course we’re not. That’s nonsense—the blood of Christ frees us from the curse.

But we are not learning faith if we give based on what we think we can afford instead of trusting in God. How that hits you may be different, but it should remain true that you seek to give more and more rather than less and less.

Does it all go to the local church? No—but if your local church is not clearly a major part of how you are involved in God’s kingdom, why are you there? If you are not learning the Word and helping widows, orphans, and aliens (ALIENS!!!) through your church, what is it doing?

And look at the other concepts: to gather and celebrate God’s grace? That should be the church as well. The giving of believers should be about living out what we see the ways of God commend to us. If your local church isn’t worthy of your giving, you should examine Scripture. Somebody’s wrong, either you or the church. It could be either one.

In Nerdiness: Shortly: is there something to animals being clean that take effort to keep? Pigs, for example, easy to keep—they eat anything.

Other types of cattle, sheep, etc.? Hard to keep. You learn shepherding and care from them. Is that part of how God determined clean from unclean?


Popular posts from this blog

Book Review: The Heart Mender by @andyandrews (Andy Andrews)

The Heart Mender: A Story of Second ChancesEver read a book that you just kind of wish is true?  That's my take on The Heart Mender by Andy Andrews.  It's a charming story of love and forgiveness, and it's woven into the historical setting of World War II America.  For the narrative alone, the book is worth the read, but the message it contains is well worth absorbing as well.However, let's drop back a minute.  This book was originally published under the title Island of Saints.  I read Island of Saints and enjoyed it greatly.  Now, Andrews has released it under a new title, with a few minor changes.  All of this is explained in the Author's Note at the beginning, but should be noted for purchaser's sake.  If you read Island of Saints, you're rereading when you read The Heart Mender.  Now, go ahead and reread it.  It will not hurt you one bit.Overall, the story is well-paced.  There are points where I'd like more detail, both in the history and the geog…

Abraham Lincoln Quoted by Jesus! Mark 3

Mark records a curious event in his third chapter (link). If you look at Mark 3:25, you'll see that Jesus quotes the sixteenth President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. After all, one of the highlights of the Lincoln years is his famous speech regarding slavery in the United States where he used the phrase that "a house divided against itself cannot stand." This speech was given in 1858 when he accepted the nomination to run against Stephen A. Douglas for Senate, but is still remembered as the defining speech regarding slaveholding in the United States. I recall being taught in school how brilliant and groundbreaking the speech was, how Lincoln had used such wise words to convey his thought. Yet the idea was not original to Lincoln. Rather, it was embedded in Lincoln from his time reading the Bible. Now, I have read varying reports about Lincoln's personal religious beliefs: some place him as a nearly completely committed Christian while others have him somewh…

Independence Day 2017

I don’t know if Thomas Paine will be aggrieved that I paste his thoughts from Common Sense here, from the electronic edition. It’s a Public Domain work at this point, so hopefully none will be bothered that I am not paying for it...I think there is value in seeing the underlying reasons of Independence. I find a couple of things noteworthy in his introduction:First, he speaks of those who disagree and, while calling those out, holds the strength of his affirmative argument will be enough to straighten them out. We could do well to think more like that.Second, his final sentence should be a required view: the influence of reason and principle. Not self-interest masquerading as principle. Not party propaganda disguised as reason.That being said, not everything Paine said is right. If he and I lived at the same time, we’d argue religion over a great deal. However, the idea of “natural rights of man” follows from the idea of humanity as a special creation—that all are created equal and en…