The reportedly promised blessing of God rebuking one’s devourer (Mal. 3:11) was made to
those giving the tithes and offerings under the Mosaic covenant that provided for sustenance
of the poor, the widows, orphans, and strangers.
527The idea behind making provision for the
sustenance of widows, orphans and strangers was that they were poor – that unless provisions
were stipulated for their sustenance they might starve to death. Their plight, and God’s
concern for them, is conjoined in such scripture as Ps. 140:12: “I know that the Lord will
maintain the cause of the afflicted, and the right of the poor,” “who executes judgment
for the oppressed; who gives food to the hungry” (Ps. 146:7, Green 2). Malachi is effectively
reporting that if one provided not only for the priestly order of the temple but also for the
poor, the widows, orphans, and strangers that only then would God ‘rebuke the devourer.’
528525 The reported curse is activated by the wealth of the rich, riches, garments, gold and silver, also involving
fraud, living in pleasure and wantoness, and condemning and killing the just. His having just quoted Luke 1: 46, 52-53 ; 1 Sam. 2: 2-8 ; and Luke 6: 20-25 to combine as a sampler, Sider reasonably states that James 5: 1, concerning the miseries to come on the rich, is part of a “a constant theme of biblical revelation.” ( Sider, Rich
Christians, p. 61 ).
526
Besides the reported curse in James 5 mentioning non-specific “miseries that shall come upon you,” this curse “shall eat your flesh as it were fire.” A consumption of the flesh has been likened by some to the action of gangrene. But it could also be argued it could be likened to phenomena associated with cancers : cancer sufferers, sadly, in the advanced stages of their consumption, suffer ‘burning pains,’ i.e. their flesh is being consumed and they suffer pains ‘like fire.’
527 Scriptures reportedly affirming God’s concern for providing for the needs of the poor ( including provision
for them by way of tithes and offerings ) : Ex. 23: 10-11, Lev. 19: 9-10, 23: 22, Deut. 15: 7-11, 10: 17-18, 14: 28-29, 16: 10-14, 24: 19-21, 26: 12-13, 27: 19. Regarding the first of these scriptures : the land was reportedly worked for six years, but every seventh year it was to lie fallow, and the poor could eat what it at that time produced spontaneously.
528 Hagin misrepresents tithing, taking reported scripture in Malachi out of context and telling Christian
believers that on their giving 10% of their income to their local church God will ‘rebuke the devourer.’Hagin cites a book from the nineteenth century by T. S. Linscott called The Path to Wealth [ Thomas Samuel Linscott,
The Path to Wealth, ( Richmond, Virginia : B. F. Johnson, 1888 ), pp. 106-110, cited in Hagin, Midas, p. 75ff. ]
This book may have influenced Hagin, for in it the author also seems to conflate the blessing of having helped the poor with the practice of tithing, saying in a prophetic manner to the tither “I will give health to all of you.” ( Linscott, Wealth reproduced in Hagin, Midas, p. 77. ) The passage from Linscott reproduced in Hagin’s Midas is rather redolent of the blessings catalogued in Deut. 28: 1-14. However, the blessings of health reported in
144
However, the Abrahamic 10% tithe Hagin teaches about is not the calculated roughly 22.3%
of one’s income inferred in Malachi required to pay one’s ‘minimum’ Mosaic ‘tithes and
offerings’ that would also sustain the poor, widows, fatherless and strangers.
529Hagin
teaches “the combined tithe [10%] of a congregation provides the funds to
support...ministering to the poor.”
530Hagin thus abnegates Christian believers’
responsibility to give to the poor through teaching their 10% tithe, far less than the
‘tithes and offerings’ of Malachi, should cover the running costs of maintaining the church
Deut. 28 and repeated en petite in Deut. 29 ( “Keep therefore the words of this covenant, and do them, that ye may prosper in all that ye do.” [ Deut. 29 : 9 ] ) are contingent on maintaining the Mosaic system’s sustenance of the poor, the widow, the fatherless, and the stranger. But under the Abrahamic tithe the blessings of health are not promised ; therefore, under the Abrahamic tithe it would only have been separate provision for the poor that would have brought God’s blessings of health for having helped the poor.
It is worthwhile considering the life of Isaac, Abraham’s reported ‘son of promise.’ It is probable that Isaac kept up his father’s tradition of tithing. However, what is reported is that Isaac would not ‘take the lead’ insofar as he did not consult God on behalf of his wife Rebekah, once she was pregnant ( Gen. 25: 22-23 ). Also, although God spoke that Jacob, the younger twin, should inherit ( “the elder shall serve the younger” verse 23 ) Isaac discarded this, and even the name given to the younger twin was the insulting ‘Jacob’ meaning ‘supplanter.’ Isaac’s favouritism of the elder twin, Esau, is first mentioned. We do not know whether Rebekah’s favouritism of Jacob was in part a reaction to this, or whether she wished to protect God’s choice of who would inherit, or whether she liked Jacob because he was a companion to her as someone “dwelling in tents” (verse 27), rather than Esau who was, in U.S. parlance, an ‘outdoorsman.’ Whereas we read of no reported sickness in Abraham, Isaac is reported as having become so blind that he could not recognise his sons by their appearance, but only by their differing voices. And Isaac attempted to go against God’s expressed bestowal of inheritance going to Jacob, and was tricked into conforming with what God was reported as having said (Gen. 27). Moreover, Isaac allowed Jacob to seek a wife with no ten camels of goods in tow (cf. Gen. 24: 10), and Jacob had no pillows (Gen. 28: 11), but he had some oil (Gen. 28: 18). I feel that it could be argued that this reported callous
treatment of his son by Isaac, a rich man, would be paralleled by this same rich man’s not being a helper of the poor ; indeed, Jacob went out a poor man and Isaac did not help him. Therefore the mention of Isaac’s blindness would, to the careful reader of the accounts, make it seem certain that Isaac was a mean man who did not help the poor (poor men like his travelling son Jacob) and who therefore did not qualify to get God’s blessing of good health.
Now, a second point. Even though it was Esau who reportedly was in fact the supplanter of all the material goods which reportedly should have gone to Jacob, Esau who inherited all of Isaac’s material wealth though Jacob had been blessed in accordance with God’s reported wishes, Jacob did not ask God for riches but all he asked for was for God to be with him, to keep him safe, and provide him with “bread to eat, and raiment to put on” ( Gen. 28: 20 ). Note that this is the same ‘food and raiment’ level of ‘neither poverty nor riches’ that 1
Timothy 6: 8 is reported as telling Christians to be content with.
529 I talk of a ‘minimum,’ which in my experience most talking of the 22.3% ‘income tax’ under the Mosaic
covenant ( such as, famously, John McArthur in the U. S. ) do not mention. Speaking of the financial obligations under the Mosaic covenant Blomberg says “Pro-rated annually, these added up to a 23.3 % tithe.” ( Blomberg,
Neither Poverty Nor Riches, p. 46, and Blomberg cites J. G. McConville, ‘Law and Theology in Deuteronomy,’ Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, 1984. ) However, as instances, this ‘minimum’ could increase if one
felt one needed to increase the number of sin offerings one made for oneself, or if one was jealous of one’s wife due to her supposed infidelity and made a jealousy offering.
530 Hagin, Midas, p. 74, and also p. 87: “your church’s income...multiplied...greater impact...helping more poor
people.” Bearing out Hagin’s de-emphasis of the individual believer’s responsibility to help the poor: “the Rhema churches of South Africa, which are associated with Hagin’s ministry, have been considered “the most compassionate and generous Christians” in South Africa.” [ Edward K. Pousson, Spreading the Flame, ( Grand Rapids : Zondervan Publications, 1992 ), p. 144, cited in Vreeland, Word of Faith Theology, p. 19. ]