Melchizedekian Tithe or a Living Sacrifice

What does Melchizedek teach us about tithe? Those who confine the principle of tithing to the Old Testament do so (usually) by pointing to its Mosaic Law origins. Under grace we are not bound by law, so why would we insist that this one piece of the law is binding now? On the other side, some who believe the principle of tithing is for the church, point to Melchizedek as proof that tithe predates law. If tithe predates law then it is a constant principle, not belonging to one era or one people. But what does the Genesis 14 actually have to say about tithe?

Who was Melchizedek? Whether or not he was preincarnate Christ is irrelevant for our study. (Although, I would like to point out that the definition of his name – “King of Righteousness” – isn’t much help in that debate. My name means “My God.”) Abram saw Melchizedek as either God, or at the very least, a representative of God. So, when tithing to him, Abram was, any way you slice it, tithing to God.

But why? What was Abram’s motive? Tithe was a common cultural practice in the suzerain/vassal society of the land. The vassal tithed as payment for and demonstration of the suzerain’s protection. In rescuing Lot, Abram also rescued the five kings of the five cities, which had been captured along with Lot. In gratitude, the king of Sodom approached Abram, we learn later, to shower him with the goods won in battle. Had Abram accepted his offer it would have been a demonstration of humility by the king of Sodom as vassal, and Abram, suzerain. It is in the middle of this encounter that Melchizedek appears and Abram demonstrates to these four pagan kings who the real Suzerain is. He uses a common expression from their culture to honor his God as the one who “delivered thine enemies into thy hand.” This is why Abram refused the offer. It would have distorted the message he was preaching. He would have communicated, “I serve the Most High who alone can deliver us, but I’ll take your cash too.” No, Abram was no suzerain. He saw himself a vassal, and also demonstrated himself to be a one through his humbled posture. The act was not one of obligation, but gratitude. It was not one of necessity. It was not what the law teaches for Levitical provision. It was not the storehouse tithe of Malachi for temple maintenance. It was a one-time act, not the regular giving a church needs today. It was a ceremony borrowed from pagans to show those same pagans who they should be serving.

The tithe sermon I have heard several times goes something like this: We take “storehouse tithe” from Malachi (which appeals to law), point to Melchizedek to prove its timelessness (which was not storehouse tithe), go to Jesus’ conversation with Pharisees for confirmation (which was actually confrontation), and finally appeal to Paul for regularity (which was actually a one time gift for a specific situation and organized for convenience). God’s Word has a much simpler plan for the church. But I’ll worn you, it’s much more demanding (Romans 12:1-2). But, that’s a whole sermon, not a blog.