Did Jesus endorse tithing for all when addressing the Pharisees?

Question

Here's the text of Luke 11:42:

“But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.” (ESV)

And Matthew 23:23:

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.” (ESV)

So, was Jesus implying that all his followers tithe? Or was he only speaking specifically to the Pharisee who was trying to live under the law? The latter seems to make more sense, but on reflection, I find I don't really have a cohesive explanation of why this should be so.

Answer 1

Actually, I don't know of any Christian denomination or individual that tithes according to the Torah of Moshe. Tithing (עישור) is a relatively complicated process in Judaism, and of course, it's hardly (if at all) practical without a Temple. If Jews cannot tithe without the Temple, then Christians certainly cannot.

With that being said, the general concept behind tithing is support of a ministry. As the Levites ministered in the Temple, and had no particular city or inheritance to lay claim to, they were thus supported by the other Israelites. Christians support the ministry of their pastors and particular churches which likewise serve God and His people.

To be specific, not a single soul tithes according to the Torah since the destruction of the Temple. Therefore, one does not need to look for a verse to support tithing, because the endeavor is futile.

On the other hand, if we're talking about the general idea of fiscal support for the ministers of God, then yes, there is a biblical basis for its current practice. Churches freely gave to Paulos in order to support his ministry (cp. 2 Cor. 11:8-9; 1 Cor. 9:6-18). One could not have expected Paulos to have a day-to-day occupation when he was traveling around the region preaching the gospel, could he?

Paulos wrote, "Even so, the Lord has ordained that those who preach the gospel should live of the gospel" (1 Cor. 9:14), and he declared that he had the authority to not work (1 Cor. 9:6).

(I doubt that I can, nor do I wish to, change the common understanding of "tithing," but for the sake of this discussion, I thought it was important to make such a distinction.)

---

Now, respecting the verses in question, as you quoted them:

Luke 11:42:

“But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.” (ESV)

Matthew 23:23:

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.” (ESV)

You asked:

So, was Jesus implying that all his followers tithe? Or was he only speaking specifically to the Pharisee who was trying to live under the law?

Actually, the Prushim did not have a choice to obey the commandment to tithe and "live under the Law." They were living in the economy of the Old Covenant, under the παιδαγωγός of the Torah of Moshe, so they were obligated to tithe, for God explicitly commanded it.

Jesus' criticism of the Prushim concerns their "hypocrisy" --- focusing on mitzvot kalot ("light commandments") while neglecting the mitzvot chamurot ("heavy commandments") (cp. Matt. 5:19). They were most scrupulous in tithing and focusing on the mitzvot kalot, but they would pervert justice, lack faith, and be merciless towards the laity.

Another example of this hypocrisy is Matt. 15; Mark 7, where the Prushim admonish Jesus' disciples for eating with dirty hands. It wasn't actually prohibited to eat with dirt on one's hands, according to the written Torah. This was a rabbinic decree, later codified in the Mishna. While the Prushim would be scrupulous about immersing so-called "unclean hands" (yadayim meso'avot or yadayim mezochamot), they were unconcerned that "from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders...all these evil things come from within, and defile the man" (Mark 7:23).

Paulos later wrote, "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God" (Rom. 10:3).

---

Who does the pronoun "you" refer to??

One might assume that all Christians are being referred to, but I believe this to be erroneous exegesis. It is clear that Jesus, like those whom he was speaking to, was born "under the Law" (Gal. 4:4). It's hardly realistic for a Christian today to assume that Jesus implored us to tithe. 1) We're not born under the Law, and 2) we live in an economy of grace (Eph. 3:2). It's absolutely imperative that the relevance of the Torah of Moshe is considered. To the Prushim, it was absolutely relevant; to us, it is essentially irrelevant. Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, keep the Law of Christ (Gal. 6:2), not the Law of Moshe. Indeed, there is a saying in Midrash Kohelet Rabba that "the Law that man learned in this world is vanity in the presence of the Messiah's Law."

As the Old Covenant passed away, so did the Law of Moshe.

Answer 2

Tithing was an institute of the Mosaic Law and consisted of agricultural produce and reared livestock (Lv 27:30-33). The Israelites offered the tithe to the landless Levites who in turn offered a tenth of the tithe to the Aaronic priesthood (Nm 18:26-28). Unlike the other tribes, the Levites were denied any inheritance or land ownership in Israel. They were, however, allocated 48 cities scattered around the nation to live, farm and herd their livestock in (Nm 35:1-3; Jo 21). The Levitical priesthood was divided into 24 courses or shifts serving at the temple a week at a time (1 Chr 24; Lk 1:5) Thus, when they weren't in Jerusalem many were evidently in their pasture lands herding their animals, which they had received from tithing (Neh 10:37-38; 13:10).

Besides this first tithe, which replaced land rights in Israel and provided basic sustenance for the Levites and priests, there was a second and third tithe. The second (or festival) tithe was brought to Jerusalem for use at the festivals and shared by all Israelites, their family and servants (Dt 12:10-19; 14:22-27; 16:11). The third (or poor) tithe, unlike the first tithe, was specifically for all the poor and needy in the land, including the Levites, strangers, orphans and widows (Dt 14:28-29; 26:12-13) and, unlike the second tithe, the third tithe was distributed locally. Even such historical records as the Apocrypha (Tb 1:6-8) and Josephus (AJ bk 4, chap 8, par 3-4, 8 & 22) are consistent with the Bible as to what comprised the tithe and whom were its recipients.

Along with the third tithe the poor, including strangers, orphans and widows, were granted gleaning rights (Dt 24:19-21, Ruth 2). They were also allowed to bring smaller offerings and less redemption money (Lv 14:21; 27:8). In view of the fact that Joseph and Mary, when presenting the newborn Jesus at the temple, didn't pay the customary offering of a first-year lamb, due to their poverty (Lk 2:22-24; Lv 12:6-8), and that Jesus was, along with His disciples, falsely accused by the Pharisees for gleaning on the Sabbath (Lk 6:1-5; Lv 19:10), it is clear that He and His disciples were poor (Mt 8:20; 2 Cor 8:9) and so weren't required to pay tithes, otherwise the Pharisees would surely have charged Him guilty of such in public.

With this background in mind we can clearly understand the context of Christ's condemnation of the Pharisees' rigid compulsion for tithing minutiae in Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42. As interpreters of the Law they were the ones who had exaggerated the Law to include the meticulous tithing of micro-small spice seeds despite the Mosaic Law not demanding any such thing. As Russell Earl Kelly explains, the Pharisees were the real hypocrites even when it came to tithing:

Alfred Edersheim explained how the Pharisees actually paid less tithe than did others. When John Hyrcanus (135-100 B.C.) enacted a new law which required the buyer to pay tithes rather than the seller, the Pharisees vowed to only trade within their own fraternities, or chabura. Thus, while others paid certain tithes every time produce exchanged hands, the Pharisees declared all except the first time to be "free" from subsequent tithing (p. 215). In addition to this, the rabbis had excluded themselves from Jewish local taxation. Thus, while the typical citizen paid at least an extra ten percent (10%) in local Jewish taxation, the Pharisees had that much extra to pay in tithes--and boasted about tithing (p. 52). Therefore, in reality, the Pharisees paid less tithes in two different ways than others who did not boast (Should the Church Teach Tithing? pp 117-118).

Note also that all of the woes Jesus pronounces in Matthew 23 are directed to the Pharisees and scribes, not to His disciples or anyone else (vv 13-16, 23, 25, 27, 29). They were the ones who were hyper-scrupulous in their ritual observance yet woefully neglectful of their moral duty toward their fellow man, which is why Jesus accused them of hypocrisy. What Jesus does advocate, however, is clearly mentioned in the preceeding verse of Luke 11:42 wherein He condemns Pharisaical tithing. And it isn’t the payment of tithes, but almsgiving to the poor and needy: “But rather give alms of such things as you have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you” (Lk 11:41). Even the apostle Paul's own ministry exemplifies this NT model of freewill giving to the poor and needy. Paul worked at his trade, like Aquila and Priscilla, to support himself and the poor brethren while preaching the gospel (Acts 18:3; 20:33-35; 1 Cor 9:18; 2 Cor 11:7-10; 12:13-14; 1 Thes 2:9; 2 Thes 3:8-10; cf Jas 1:27), initially in Jewish synagogues on the Sabbaths and then, when the Jews had forbade him, in the lecture halls or marketplaces throughout the week (Acts 13:5, 14, 44; 14:1; 16:13; 17:1-2, 10-11, 17; 18:4, 19; 19:8-9) besides in fellow believers' homes (Acts 20:20; Rom 16:5). According to this NT ideal, therefore, the gospel worker should earn a living and give to the poor.

Under the Old Covenant only the Levitical priests could "draw near" to God and the penalty for disobedience was death (Nm 18:7, 22). The book of Hebrews describes the superiority of this new model: with the new covenant the Levitical priesthood, the physical temple and its associated tithes, sacrifices and offerings have all been abolished and replaced by the high priesthood of Christ Jesus, His "once for all" perfect sacrifice, and the priesthood of all Christian believers (Heb 7:15-17; 9:11-12, 24-26; 10:19-22; 1 Pt 2:9-10). Thus, the "disannulling" (Heb 7:18) of every ordinance pertaining to the Levitical priesthood and temple service included tithing--its chief means of financial support. Now every Christian believer-priest may "draw near" to God (Heb 7:19, 25; 10:22) through Jesus as High Priest, wherein believers might "come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need" (Heb 4:16).

Answer 3

I think the exact verses you mention will directly answer the question. First the context is Jesus in his opposition to the mentality of the Pharisees as opposed to his disciples and the beatitudes which they were to emulate (Math Ch. 5). The Pharisees are characterized in the gospels of being self-righteous man-pleasers who do everything in the eyes of men to gain religious esteem and honor while ignoring God and the spirit of his laws. So first we must rule out Christians as the audience.

Second, the Pharisees in the matter of tithing went beyond the requirements of the Law and followed their own ‘traditions’. Traditionalism taught that through additional laws, the elders put a ‘hedge of protection’ around the Law, to ensure no command was broken. In practice they made their Laws ‘equal to’, or rather ‘greater than’ the Laws of scripture. In the matter of tithing, Jesus spoke a parable about a Pharisee (and a tax collector) who went way beyond the requirements of the law and tithed on ‘all that he received’ (Luke 18:12).

The motive for their going beyond the Law in externals was from an inner aversion to the internals of the Law. It was there sinful distaste of the spirit of the Law and their inability to follow it, while seeking to justify themselves by their own effort and toil that made them legalists. This naturally leads to neglecting the spirit of the law and inventing all sorts of external regulations, which one can ‘show’ to another that he had obeyed. This also lead hypocrites to harshly judge others who do not externally measure up and this ‘judgment’ came from jealous desires to commit the sins they see others do, while suffering under their own rules and burden. At least that is how the heart of the older brother in the prodigal son parable suggests. This is the spirit of hypocrisy and it is in direct contrast to Christ’s teaching about making the inside of the cup clean, rather than just the outer. Although Christian’s can be hypocritical, 'the hypocrites' that Jesus refers to must be understood an as non-Christians, or unbelievers, not real Jews. A ‘hypocrite’ is just as bad as a ‘murderer’, a ‘thief’, a ‘drunkard’; it is a termed to define a person without faith. Only in the case of the hypocrite, they are very religious and zealous for good works while being faithless.

Although I do not always agree with Peter Lange’s comments, he is especially clear on this verse:

The ordinances concerning tithes (Lev. 27:30; Num. 18:21; Deut. 12:6; 14:22–28) placed the fruits of the field and of the trees under the obligation; but tradition applied the law to the smallest produce of the garden, to the mint, the dill, and the cummin (Babyl. Joma, f. 83, 2. Lightfoot, HOTTINGER: De decimis Judœor.)—The weightier things: βαρύτερα.—De Wette: Those things which were harder, difficiliora. Meyer: The more important, graviora. “It is very probable that Jesus referred to the analogy of the praœpta gravia (חמורים) et levia (קלים) among the Jewish teachers. (See Schöttgen, p. 183.)” But there is no need to distinguish things so closely connected: the important supposes the difficult. Pharisaism is led into legalism and ceremonialism by its aversion to the difficult requirements of internal spiritual religion. (Commentary on Mathew, JOHN PETER LANGE)

Now, what you will find in many Christian books and churches is that the phrase ‘you ought to have done’ is saying that Jesus congratulated their nitpicking legalistic observance of the tithe, ergo, we should also as Christians follow such punctiliousness?! Nothing could be further from the spirit of this verse and really questions whether we understand hypocrisy at all. Rather, Jesus is saying, 'you do well' with part sarcasm. Taking care abut those small matters (for all aspects of the laws of Moses were to be obeyed) is good but it is said in a sarcastic tone, knowing they excelled beyond what was required to their self-righteous satisfaction. However, while taking so much care in comparatively 'nothing', it only increases the guilt in neglecting the weightier matters of the Law! Jesus is not congratulating those who he proclaims ‘woe’ and ‘warnings of hell’ upon! That is pure nonsense to understand the verse that way.

In conclusion the only thing we can draw about tithing from these versus is that the Pharisees went even beyond the Laws of Moses wickedly. As this particular law is never mentioned after Christ’s resurrection, it is just one of hundreds of external ceremonial/theocracy laws that were superseded under the New Covenant. Paul does not even mention it in all his writings which means it was not even on the radar of anybody.

Of course inner righteousness under the gospel includes giving and in every mention of giving in the Epistles, it is in the context of a free will offering from a cheerful heart, not an obligation under any percent rule or ceremonial/theocracy law.

Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. (2 Corinthians 9:7)

---

Note: I should mention I have been to a few excellent churches that politely argued for the continuance of the 10% tithe so I would not write them off as hypocrites on this subject alone. Although Jesus is hotly opposing the Pharisees, it on many issues not just this one aspect. We all have our faults and areas of confusion.