[Nitehawk013]

There is a difference between having an example of somethign happening before the law and the point where something becomes established as a requirement by God. Tithing existed before the law. Heck, it was a cultural practice. You gave a tenth to kings and such. The fact that men did it doesn't mean God established it.

It was not established as God's intended method of giving to support the priesthood until the Law. There was no command to obediance, or punishment for lack of tithing, until the Law. So examples of tithing prior to the establishment of the Law are not the same as that which then becamse a mandate under the Law. That really shouldn't be that hard to understand. Especially not when you consider the circumstances around the pre-law tithing examples. Abraham didn't tithe of his own earnings or crops. He gave of th espoils of war, which was outlawed under the Law regarding tithes. Jacob only said he would give IF God first blessed him. Again, not in line with the tithe as established under the Law. If anything, Jacob's act supports and enforces what we call modern day grace giving. You give as you can when God blesses you. You don't give if you have nothing to give.

The circumcision example fails. Its not apples to apples. While circum may not be spelled out in great detail under the law, tithing was VERY detailed. What was required, by whom, where to give, when to give, who it was for, etc were all spelled out in great detail. The church today fails to meet EVERY aspect of the tithe detailed in the law. The ony thing held in common is calling it a tithe. I was going to say the fact that it is 10% is still in common, but that would be incorrect as well since the TitheS spelled out for Israel totalled either 23 1/3 or 30% depending on your preferred interpretation.