Search This Blog

Wednesday, 24 March 2021

On tithing.:The Watchtower Society's commentary.

 TITHE


A tenth part, or 10 percent, given or paid as a tribute, especially for religious purposes.
The Bible tells of two instances prior to the setting up of the Law covenant in which a tenth part of possessions was paid to God or to his representative. The first of these was on the occasion when Abraham gave Melchizedek one tenth of the spoils of his victory over Chedorlaomer and his allies. (Ge 14:18-20) The apostle Paul cites this incident as proof that Christ’s priesthood according to the manner of Melchizedek is superior to that of Levi, since Levi, being in the loins of Abraham, paid tithes, in effect, to Melchizedek. (Heb 7:4-10) The second case concerned Jacob, who vowed at Bethel to give one tenth of his substance to God.—Ge 28:20-22.
These two accounts, however, are merely instances of voluntarily giving one tenth. There is no record to the effect that Abraham or Jacob commanded their descendants to follow such examples, thereby establishing a religious practice, custom, or law. It would have been superfluous for Jacob, if already under a compulsory obligation to pay tithes, to vow to do so, as he did. It is therefore evident that the tithing arrangement was not a custom or a law among the early Hebrews. It was instituted with the inauguration of the Law covenant, not before.
Mosaic Tithing Laws. Jehovah gave Israel tithing laws for definite purposes, apparently involving the use of two tenths of their annual income, except during the Sabbath years, when no tithe was paid, since no income was anticipated. (Le 25:1-12) However, some scholars believe there was only one tithe. Such tithes were in addition to the firstfruits they were under obligation to offer to Jehovah.—Ex 23:19; 34:26.
The first tithe, consisting of one tenth of the produce of the land and fruit trees and (evidently of the increase) of the herds and flocks, was brought to the sanctuary and given to the Levites, since they had no inheritance in the land but were devoted to the service of the sanctuary. (Le 27:30-32; Nu 18:21, 24) The Levites, in turn, gave a tenth of what they received to the Aaronic priesthood for their support.—Nu 18:25-29.
Evidently the grain was threshed and the fruit of the vine and of the olive tree was converted into wine and oil before tithing. (Nu 18:27, 30; Ne 10:37) If an Israelite wished to give money instead of this produce, he could do so, provided he added an additional fifth to the valuation. (Le 27:31) But it was different with the flock and the herd. As the animals came out of the pen one by one through a gate, the owner stood by the gate with a rod and marked every tenth one as the tithe, without examination or selection.—Le 27:32, 33.
It seems there was an additional tithe, a second tenth, set aside each year for purposes other than the direct support of the Levitical priesthood, though the Levites shared in it. Normally it was used and enjoyed in large measure by the Israelite family when assembling together at the national festivals. In cases where the distance to Jerusalem was too great for the convenient transport of this tithe, then the produce was converted into money and this, in turn, was used in Jerusalem for the household’s sustenance and enjoyment during the holy convention there. (De 12:4-7, 11, 17, 18; 14:22-27) Then, at the end of every third and sixth years of the seven-year sabbatical cycle, this tithe, instead of being used to defray expenses at the national assemblies, was set aside for the Levites, alien residents, widows, and fatherless boys in the local community.—De 14:28, 29; 26:12.
These tithing laws binding on Israel were not excessive. Nor should it be overlooked that God promised to prosper Israel by opening “the floodgates of the heavens” if his tithing laws were obeyed. (Mal 3:10; De 28:1, 2, 11-14) When the people became negligent as to tithing, the priesthood suffered, for the priests and Levites were forced to spend their time in secular work and consequently neglected their ministerial services. (Ne 13:10) Such unfaithfulness tended to bring about a decline in true worship. Sadly, when the ten tribes fell away to calf worship, they used the tithe to support that false religion. (Am 4:4, 5) On the other hand, when Israel was faithful to Jehovah and was under the rule of righteous administrators, tithing for the Levites was restored, and true to Jehovah’s promise, there were no shortages.—2Ch 31:4-12; Ne 10:37, 38; 12:44; 13:11-13.
Under the Law there was no stated penalty to be applied to a person failing to tithe. Jehovah placed all under a strong moral obligation to provide the tithe; at the end of the three-year tithing cycle, they were required to confess before him that the tithe had been paid in full. (De 26:12-15) Anything wrongfully withheld was viewed as something stolen from God.—Mal 3:7-9.
By the first century C.E., the Jewish religious leaders, particularly among the scribes and Pharisees, were making a sanctimonious show of tithing and other outward works, in a form of worship, but their hearts were far removed from God. (Mt 15:1-9) Jesus reproved them for their selfish, hypocritical attitude, calling attention to their being meticulous to give a tenth even of “the mint and the dill and the cumin”—something they should have done—yet at the same time disregarding “the weightier matters of the Law, namely, justice and mercy and faithfulness.” (Mt 23:23; Lu 11:42) By way of illustration, Jesus contrasted the Pharisee who boastfully felt self-righteous because of his own works of fasting and tithing, with the tax collector who, though considered as nothing by the Pharisee, humbled himself, confessed his sins to God, and begged for divine mercy.—Lu 18:9-14.
No Tithing for Christians. At no time were first-century Christians commanded to pay tithes. The primary purpose of the tithing arrangement under the Law had been to support Israel’s temple and priesthood; consequently the obligation to pay tithes would cease when that Mosaic Law covenant came to an end as fulfilled, through Christ’s death on the torture stake. (Eph 2:15; Col 2:13, 14) It is true that Levitical priests continued serving at the temple in Jerusalem until it was destroyed in 70 C.E., but Christians from and after 33 C.E. became part of a new spiritual priesthood that was not supported by tithes.—Ro 6:14; Heb 7:12; 1Pe 2:9.
As Christians, they were encouraged to give support to the Christian ministry both by their own ministerial activity and by material contributions. Instead of giving fixed, specified amounts to defray congregational expenses, they were to contribute “according to what a person has,” giving “as he has resolved in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” (2Co 8:12; 9:7) They were encouraged to follow the principle: “Let the older men who preside in a fine way be reckoned worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard in speaking and teaching. For the scripture says: ‘You must not muzzle a bull when it threshes out the grain’; also: ‘The workman is worthy of his wages.’” (1Ti 5:17, 18) However, the apostle Paul set an example in seeking to avoid bringing an undue financial burden on the congregation.—Ac 18:3; 1Th 2:9.

Wednesday, 10 March 2021

File under "Well said" LXII

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble,finding it everywhere,diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies."

Groucho Marx.

Tuesday, 17 November 2020

The Divided States of America?

 Time for red America and blue America to part ways?



How to split the USA into two countries: Red and Blue

Progressive America would be half as big, but twice as populated as its conservative twin.

How to split the USA into two countries: Red and Blue
Image: Dicken Schrader
  • America's two political tribes have consolidated into 'red' and 'blue' nations, with seemingly irreconcilable differences.
  • Perhaps the best way to stop the infighting is to go for a divorce and give the two nations a country each
  • Based on the UN's partition plan for Israel/Palestine, this proposal provides territorial contiguity and sea access to both 'red' and 'blue' America

If more proof were needed that the U.S. is two nations in one, it was offered by the recent mid-term elections. Democrats swept the House, but Republicans managed to increase their Senate majority. There is less middle ground, and less appetite for compromise, than ever.

To oversimplify America's electoral divide: Democrats win votes in urban, coastal areas; Republicans gain seats in the rural middle of the country. Those opposing blocs have consolidated into 'red' and 'blue' states decades ago.

Occasionally, and often after tight-run presidential elections, that divide is translated into a cartographic meme that reflects the state of the nation.

Jesusland vs. the U.S. of Canada

Canada annexes the entire West Coast and borders Mexico.

Image: Strange Maps

In 2004, this cartoon saw the states that had voted for Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry join America's northern neighbor to form the United States of Canada. The states re-electing George W. Bush were dubbed Jesusland.

Trumpistan vs. Clintonesia

Trumpistan is a perforated continent, Clintonesia is a disjointed archipelago.

Image: The New York Times.

In 2016, these two maps disassembled the U.S. into Trumpistan, a vast, largely empty and severely punctuated land mass; and Clintonesia, a much smaller but more densely populated archipelago whose biggest bits of dry land were at the edges, with a huge, empty sea in the middle.

Soyland vs. the FSA

Following state borders, a line separates 'red' America (in the south) from the 'blue' half of the country.

Image: Jesse Kelly

Writing in The Federalist, Jesse Kelly in April this year likened America to a couple that can't stop fighting and should get a divorce. Literally. His proposal was to split the country into two new ones: a 'red' state and a 'blue' state.

On a map accompanying the article, he proposed a division of the U.S. into the People's Republic of Soyland and the Federalist States of America (no prizes for guessing Mr Kelly's politics).

It's a fairly crude map. For example, it includes Republican-leaning states such as Montana and the Dakotas in the 'blue' state for seemingly no other reason than to provide a corridor between the blue zones in the west and east of the country.

Mr Kelly admitted that his demarcational talents left some room for improvement: "We can and will draw the map and argue over it a million different ways for a million different reasons but draw it we must," he wrote. "I suspect the final draft would look similar (to mine)."

Partition, Palestine-style

A county-level division between red and blue, with contiguous territories for both.

Image: Dicken Schrader.

"No, this map won't do," comments reader Dicken Schrader. "It's too crude and would leave too many members of the 'blue' tribe in the 'red' nation, and too much 'red' in the 'blue' state."

Agreeing with the basic premise behind Mr Kelly's map but not with its crude execution, Mr Schrader took it upon himself to propose a better border between red and blue.

Analyzing election maps from the past 12 years, he devised his own map of America's two nations, "inspired by the original UN partition map for Israel and Palestine from 1947." Some notes on the map:

  • To avoid the distortions of gerrymandering, it is based on electoral majorities in counties, rather than electoral districts.
  • As with the UN partition plan for Israel/Palestine, all territories of both states are contiguous. There are no enclaves. Citizens of either state can travel around their nation without having to cross a border.
  • The intersections between both nations are placed at actual interstate overpasses, so both states have frictionless access to their own territory.
  • In order to avoid enclaves, some 'blue' islands had to be transferred to 'red', and some 'red' zones were granted to the 'blue' nation. "This exchange is fair to both sides, in terms of area and population".
  • Both nations have access to the East, West and Gulf Coasts, and each has a portion of Alaska.

​Red vs. blue

Washington DC would remain part of 'blue' America, and its capital.

Image: Dicken Schrader

Some interesting stats on these two new nations:

Progressive America (blue)

  • Area: 1.44 million sq. mi (3.74 million km2), 38% of the total U.S.
  • Population: 210 million, 64.5% of the total U.S.
  • Pop. Density: 146 inhabitants/sq mi (56/km2), similar to Mexico
  • Capital: Washington DC
  • Ten Largest Cities: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, San Jose, Jacksonville

Conservative America (red)

  • Area: 2.35 million sq. mi (6.08 million km2), 62% of the total
  • Population: 115.4 million, 35.5% of the total
  • Pop. Density: 49 inhabitants/sq mi (19/km2), similar to Sudan
  • Capital: Dallas
  • Ten Largest Cities: Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth, Charlotte, Nashville, Oklahoma City, Louisville, Kansas City, Omaha, Colorado Springs.

What about the nukes?

The partition would not create enclaves, but allow citizens of either nation frictionless access to the entire territory of their state.

Image: Dicken Schrader

'Blue' America would be roughly half the size of 'red' America but have almost double the population.

In terms of area, 'blue' America would be the 13th-largest country in the world, larger than Mexico but smaller than Saudi Arabia. 'Red' America would be the 6th-largest country in the world, larger than India but smaller than Australia.

In terms of population, 'blue' America would now be the 5th-most populous county in the world, with more population than Brazil but less than Indonesia. 'Red' America would be the 12th, with more population than Ethiopia but less than Japan.

For those who think this divorce would end the argument between both tribes, consider that both countries would still have to live next to each other. And then there's the question of the kids. Or, in Mr Schrader's translation to geopolitics: "Who gets the nukes?"

--

Many thanks to Mr Schrader for sending in this map.

Strange Maps #948

Got a strange map? Let me know at strangemaps@gmail.com.

Yes, more and more young adults are living with their parents – but is that necessarily bad?

Having grown kids still at home is not likely to do you, or them, any permanent harm.

 
Photo by Parker Gibbons on Unsplash

When the Pew Research Center recently reported that the proportion of 18-to-29-year-old Americans who live with their parents has increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, perhaps you saw some of the breathless headlines hyping how it's higher than at any time since the Great Depression.

 Keep reading

What ended the Black Death, history's worst pandemic

The bubonic plague ravaged the world for centuries, killing up to 200 million people.

 

A man dresses as a plague doctor at the Bannockburn Live event on June 28, 2014 in Stirling, Scotland.

Photo by Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images
  • The Plague was the worst pandemic in history, killing up to 200 million people.
  • The disease spread through air, rats and fleas, and decimated Europe for several centuries.
  • The pandemic eased with better sanitation, hygiene, and medical advancements but never completely disappeared.
  •  Keep reading
    Scroll down to load more…