And we made ordinances for us, to charge ourselves yearly with the third part of a shekel for the service of the house of our God,
In Nehemiah 10 the people back from exile sealed a written agreement to keep God's law. Verse 32 is where they put a price on it — a yearly charge on every person to pay for the work of the temple.
Most of the covenant repeats rules the people already had in writing. This clause does not. One writer points out that the people here move from obeying texts to applying them:
In verses 32 to 34 they impose commandments on themselves. These give proof of real understanding of the mind of God. They had no formal text to act on. But it was "written in the law" that they must offer sacrifices, and that was enough to move each one to take on the expense according to his means. It was the same with bringing wood to the house of God. Nowhere did the law command them to supply it. Yet they were sure they were answering the mind of God by sharing in this task, since without wood no one could offer sacrifices.
The closest earlier parallel is the half shekel paid at the tabernacle, Israel's tent of worship before the temple. One writer traces how the amount changed:
They were weak and in bondage to the Gentiles. Even so, they wanted to order everything connected with the Lord and His claims by what the law of Moses laid down for them. First, everyone was to give a third of a shekel for the service of the house of God. As far as we can discover from the Scriptures, there was no legal precedent for this voluntary charge. At the building of the Tabernacle the law required a half shekel from each person at every census of Israel… That no doubt suggested the yearly gift we have here, probably lowered to a third of a shekel because they were poor. In later years they raised it to half a shekel, and it became a tax on every Jew.
The givers were poor and few. One writer weighs what their gift meant:
It is beautiful, whatever the later failure, to see the hearts of these poor returned captives flow out in love to the house of their God, so that He might be honoured… Those who came back from captivity were few. Yet they stood on the ground of the whole nation before God, so they held the whole of Israel in their thoughts. By caring for the sacrifices they showed that only the power of these offerings could secure and keep that ground.
Nehemiah's own work had been the rebuilding of Jerusalem's defences. Yet the sealed agreement pays for something else:
The covenant gives the house of God a very prominent place, yet it never mentions the city walls and gates. Why leave them out, when Nehemiah's own special service was the walls and gates? And why is so much made of the house of God? Is it not to insist on the great fact… that the great test of faithfulness was the upkeep of the house, and the support of those who served in it? The test was also obedience to the principles of divine order, and consistency with them — principles the house always recalled and pictured.
This yearly charge outlived Nehemiah's generation. It turns up again in the Gospels:
The Jews asked Peter if his teacher paid the temple tax. The word here is didrachmon (double drachma). It means the sum each Jew paid to the temple. The fish Peter caught had in its mouth a stater, a coin that paid for both the Lord and Peter (Matthew 17:24-27). The Lord points to what the kings of the earth did in ordinary tribute. He shows that He Himself and Peter, as sons of the King of the temple, could have claimed exemption, though they did not… The setting up of this yearly payment apparently began in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah… So far, it was a voluntary arrangement.
One writer sees a model in their aim, and a warning in their method:
These returned exiles saw that all their prosperity and blessing depended on the upkeep of the house. That is very happy, and it points the way of spiritual prosperity and blessing for the people of God in our day (Haggai 2:18-19). But the way they sought to carry out their obligations should be a warning, not an example, to those who live in a day of grace. The remnant of Nehemiah's day took up the upkeep of the house by way of covenant. That fits the age of law in which they lived. Yet the history of their nation warns us how useless it is for man to enter into a covenant with God.
- Small sum. A third of a shekel a year — likely lowered from a half because they were poor — paid for the whole service of God's house.
- Self-imposed. No text named this amount. They reasoned from the law, and each took on the cost according to his means.
- Wide reach. The few who returned gave for all Israel. The sacrifices kept the whole nation's ground before God.
- House first. The upkeep of the house, not the wall, was the great test of faithfulness.
- Long echo. The same payment became the temple tax of the Gospels. The Lord paid it, though as the King's Son He could have claimed exemption.
for the bread to be set in rows, and for the continual oblation, and for the continual burnt-offering, [for that] of the sabbaths [and] of the new moons, for the set feasts and for the holy [things], and for the sin-offerings to make an atonement for Israel, and [for] all the work of the house of our God.
The returned exiles have just sealed a written covenant. Its last section turns from their own conduct to the upkeep of God's house — a yearly payment for the bread, the offerings, and the sin offerings for Israel. Two questions sit behind the list. Why a third of a shekel? And why does a small, poor group pay for a whole nation's sacrifices?
One commentator traces where the idea came from, and what became of the sum later.
Though weak, and under Gentile rule, they wanted to order everything connected with the Lord and His claims by what the law of Moses had laid on them... As far as can be found in the Scriptures, there was no legal precedent for this voluntary payment. When the tabernacle was built, the ordinance was this: at every census of the children of Israel, each one counted should give half a shekel, "to make atonement for your lives." This no doubt suggested the yearly contribution before us, probably lowered to a third of a shekel because of their poverty. In later years the sum rose to half a shekel, and became a tax on every Jew. It was about this that the collectors asked Peter, "Does your teacher not pay the tax?"
Poverty shaped the amount. It did not stop the giving. Atonement money lay behind the old half shekel, and atonement runs through this verse too.
Their covenant kept to what God's word already asked. This payment went beyond it.
All this is still in sweet and wonderful harmony with the whole of their actions in this day of happy revival. The word of God is honoured again and again, and all the way through, in all its demands. But added things appear in their services and activities — such things as the fresh energy and grace of a time of revival would suggest, and the Spirit would warrant.
The verse reads like a budget. One commentator reads each line of it as a picture of Christ.
The money they gave paid for the continual showbread. Made up of twelve loaves, it represented the twelve tribes of Israel in association with Christ and before God... Every kind of offering was to be provided and offered for Israel. Each one represents Christ: Christ in the devotedness of His life, His perfect humanity, Christ in His devotedness to death for the glory of God, and Christ as the sin-bearer.
Only a fragment of the nation had come back, yet the sin offerings they paid for covered all Israel.
The children of the captivity were few, but they stood on the ground of the whole nation before God. So they took the whole of Israel into their thoughts. By caring for the sacrifices they showed that this ground could only be secured and kept by the power of those sacrifices. They truly valued the Lord's claims, and they saw the only possible ground on which they themselves could stand before Him.
The verse ends with the work of the house of our God. The people who paid for that work knew what it lacked.
"The house of our God" was precious even to those who knew the glory was no longer there. The name of Jesus should mean that much to us and more. For we are now built together as a dwelling place for God in the Spirit — the Spirit of truth, given to be with us forever.
One commentator holds two things together here: the warmth of their love, and the weakness of their promise.
It is beautiful, whatever the later failure, to see the hearts of these poor returned captives flow out in love to the house of their God. They wanted Him honoured. They wanted their standing before Him through His own ordinances in the sanctuary.
But it is one thing, as everyone knows, to vow, and another to perform. When some strong influence takes hold of us, and shuts out everything except the one thing set before us, it is easy to bind ourselves to it for ever. Then the influence passes away. The object we had before us seems as desirable as ever, but the urge to reach it is no longer felt. Along with this loss of power the flesh reasserts itself. In the end the "covenant" that seemed so easy to keep when we made it becomes impossible, and adds another burden to an already bad conscience.
- Small coin. A third of a shekel, likely lowered from the older half shekel because the people were poor. Their means shrank; their giving did not.
- Free gift. No law required this charge. It grew out of the fresh energy of a time of revival, and it honoured God's word instead of replacing it.
- Whole Christ. The bread and the offerings each picture Christ: His life, His perfect humanity, His death for God's glory, His bearing of sin.
- Whole nation. Few as they were, they paid for atonement for all Israel — a small group refusing to shrink its heart to its own size.
- Weak vow. The love behind it was real, but the promise outran the power. What is easy to pledge in a moment of feeling becomes a burden later.
And we cast the lots among the priests, the Levites, and the people, for the wood-offering, to bring [it] into the house of our God, according to our fathers' houses, at times appointed year by year, to burn upon the altar of Jehovah our God, as it is written in the law;
After sealing a written covenant, the returned exiles settled who would keep the altar supplied with fuel. Priests, Levites and ordinary families all drew lots — but why call firewood an "offering," and can a people keep what they have signed?
Firewood sounds like the least spiritual item in the covenant. One commentator ties the arrangement to the law's demand for a fire that never goes out:
They had to make this provision, for the fire on the altar was never to go out. So they chose priests to attend to the altar, and Levites to help the priests in this service. Others among the people brought the wood needed for the holy fire. They were to order and care for everything, "as it is written in the law." They had begun to understand that God's thoughts must govern in God's things.
Why should a fire matter so much? One writer reads it as a picture of God's holiness meeting Christ's sacrifice:
The fire on the altar consumed the burnt offering, and the fat of the peace offering. It was the fitting expression of divine holiness. That holiness found proper material to feed on in Christ and His perfect sacrifice. That fire was never to go out. There was to be the constant maintenance of that which set forth the action of divine holiness. Through the dark and silent hours of the night, the fire blazed on the altar of God.
No law required Israel to supply firewood. One commentator explains why they took it on anyway:
In verses 32 to 34, they themselves impose commandments, which give proof of real understanding of the mind of God. They did not have formal texts to act on. But it was "written in the law" that sacrifices were to be offered. That was enough to move each one to take the expense on himself according to his means. And so it was with the wood to be brought to the house of God. Nowhere did the law command them to supply it. Yet they were sure they answered to the mind of God by sharing in this task. Without the wood they could not offer sacrifices.
The lot fell across every class. One writer sees the same spirit here as when they built the wall:
It is pleasant to see here, as also when they were building the wall in Nehemiah 3, how rank and station lost themselves in common brotherhood. … They also make ordinances for themselves, to be charged yearly with a third of a shekel for the service of the house of God; and they cast lots to bring wood for the altar of God at appointed seasons.
Sincerity is not the issue; staying power is. One writer traces how an agreement made in a moment of strong feeling becomes a weight later on:
It is one thing, as everyone knows, to vow, and another to perform. Some powerful influence moves us, and it shuts out everything except the one thing then before our souls. At such a moment it is easy to bind ourselves to pursue that one object forever. The influence passes away, and while the object we had before us seems as desirable as ever, the urge to reach it is no longer felt. Along with this loss of power, the flesh reasserts itself. In the end the "covenant" that seemed so easy to keep when we made it becomes impossible. It adds another burden to an already bad conscience.
That is what happened. The same writer shows Nehemiah appointing the wood offering again:
Nehemiah still continued his work of reformation. He says, "So I cleansed them from everything foreign, and I appointed the duties of the priests and the Levites, each in his work; and for the wood offering, at appointed times, and for the firstfruits." For the moment everything is ordered according to God. In this way Nehemiah becomes a shadow, if not a distinct type, of Him who will "sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and He shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer to the Lord an offering in righteousness."
- Fire. The altar flame was never to go out. The wood kept coming so the sacrifice could burn.
- Meaning. That fire expressed divine holiness. It fed on Christ and His perfect sacrifice.
- Discernment. No law ordered a wood offering. They reasoned from what was written and supplied what the sacrifice had to have.
- Everyone. Priests, Levites and people all drew lots, and rank lost itself in shared responsibility.
- Renewal. The vow outran their strength. Nehemiah appointed the wood offering again — a picture of the One who purifies His servants so their offering stands.
and to bring the first-fruits of our land, and the first-fruits of all fruit of all trees, year by year to the house of Jehovah,
This pledge closes a long, signed agreement, made by people who had just heard the law read aloud and confessed their sins. Now they promise God the first of every harvest — but why the first, why the house, and could they keep it?
The list of promises in this chapter is striking for what it leaves out.
It is striking that the covenant gives such a prominent place to the house of God, yet never mentions the city walls and gates. Why leave them out, when Nehemiah's own special service had to do with the walls and gates? ... The great test of faithfulness was the upkeep of the house and the support of those who served in it. It was also a test of obedience to the principles of God's order, and of staying consistent with them. The house was always the reminder and symbol of those principles. Yet there was no Presence in the house as there had been long ago, and it was only of value as long as its moral features were kept up... So families, cattle, fruits, harvests and the grape crop all had to give from the country to the house. This acknowledged God, and it supported the priests, Levites, singers and gatekeepers.
This part of the covenant asked nothing new of them.
As for the firstfruits and tithes, they only had to follow what was plainly "written in the law." In all this they acted with one mind. Everything looks simple and easy when there is fellowship among brothers, and when their only motive for acting is the service of the house of God.
Each year the first ripe grain and the first fruit of the orchard went to God's house. One writer finds in that basket a picture the offerers themselves could not yet read.
They could not enter, as we can, into the blessed teaching pictured by the firstfruits; but Christ as the firstfruits (1 Cor. 15:23) was before the eye of God, and gave the offerings of His people all His own value and preciousness.
The law elsewhere shows why God asked for the first portion rather than the leftovers.
The people enjoyed these fruits of God's goodness, and they gave Him back the firstfruits. This was their witness that everything came from Him, that everything was His, and that His grace had given it to them... So the firstfruits were not for the people to eat. They offered them to God and ate all the rest. It was the recognition of God, while sharing His blessings. The firstfruits were offered to God, and so came to the priests as their portion.
The people's aim was right. The way they went about it is another matter.
This group who had returned from exile saw that all their prosperity and blessing depended on the upkeep of the house. That is a happy thing, and it points the way to spiritual prosperity and blessing for the people of God today (Haggai 2:18-19). But the method they chose for carrying out their obligations should be a warning to us rather than an example, for we live in a day of grace. They took up the house's upkeep by way of a covenant, which suited the age of law they lived in. Yet the history of their nation warns us how useless it is for a man to enter into a covenant with God. Did not Israel in their early days make a covenant, with disastrous results? After three months of constant failure on their part, and tireless grace on the Lord's part, they made a covenant at Sinai, saying, "All that the LORD has spoken we will do" (Ex. 24).
The same test reaches us. Where blessing seems blocked, God's first call may not be to pray harder.
Notice that God does not say, "PRAY, and I will open the windows of heaven," but, "Bring the full tithe into the storehouse." It would be good if this passage were read and explained at prayer meetings sometimes. It might remind us of the real hindrances to blessing. Prayer is always good. But to pray while we are holding back from God, and without judging ourselves about it, is useless.
- Written. Firstfruits needed no debate. The law had already said what to bring, and the people acted as one.
- First. The first of the ground and of every tree went to God. It confessed that the whole harvest came from Him and belonged to Him.
- House. Families, cattle, fruits and harvests all flowed one way — to God's house, and so to the priests and Levites who served there.
- Christ. They could not yet read the picture. Christ as the firstfruits was before God, and His value made their baskets precious.
- Promise. Their aim was right, but a signed promise is not the same as a kept one. Writers take their method as a warning, not a model.
and the firstborn of our sons and of our cattle, as it is written in the law; and to bring the firstlings of our herds and of our flocks to the house of our God, to the priests that minister in the house of our God;
In this chapter the people sign a covenant. Its last section deals with God's house, and this verse belongs there: the firstborn of sons, cattle, herds and flocks all go to the priests. Behind the list lies one question — what does it mean that the first of everything we own already belongs to God?
Notice what this covenant makes much of, and what it never mentions. This verse is one of the ties between the countryside and the house of God.
The covenant gives a very prominent place to the house of God, but there is no mention of the city walls and gates… The great test of faithfulness was the upkeep of the house, the support of those who ministered in it, and obedience to, and consistency with, the principles of divine order, which the house always pictured and recalled. Yet God's Presence was not in the house as it had been long ago. The house had value only so far as the people kept up its moral character. The whole people pledged their support to the house rather than to the wall… So families, cattle, fruits, harvests, vintage, were all to contribute from the country to the house, for a recognition of God, and for the support of the priests, Levites, singers and porters.
Why the firstborn? The answer lies back in Egypt.
In this promise they acknowledged themselves as a redeemed people. When "the LORD killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man and the firstborn of animals," He commanded His people to sacrifice to Him all the males that first open the womb. But He gave them permission to redeem the firstborn of their children. … The restored remnant went back to this ordinance, remembering with thanks that God had brought them up out of the land of Egypt, and in recognition of what was due to the LORD their Redeemer.
The chapter mixes two kinds of promise. Some came from the people's own sense of God's mind. This one rests on what is "written in the law."
In verses 32 to 34 the people lay commandments on themselves, and these show real understanding of the mind of God. They had no formal text to act on. But it was "written in the law" that sacrifices must be offered, and that was enough to move each one to take the cost on himself according to his means… With the firstfruits and tithes, they only had to keep to what was plainly "written in the law."
God asks for the first share, not just a share. The same pattern runs through Scripture.
In the Proverbs we read, "Honor the LORD with your wealth and with the firstfruits of all your produce." (Prov. 3:9.) God kept the priests by giving them parts of the various offerings. He also said, "All the best of the oil and all the best of the wine and of the grain, the firstfruits of what they give to the LORD, I give to you" (Num. 18:12). This is another example that the first and best of all we are, and have, are to be devoted to God. When we judge our own state, it is hard to overrate this question: do we make a habit of giving God our first and best?
God spared the firstborn, then claimed them. That double move is where this verse touches every redeemed person.
The blood at the Passover saved Israel's firstborn. But those it redeemed belonged to God in a special way. "Consecrate to me all the firstborn… is mine." (Exodus 13:2.) So the firstborn was not merely redeemed from death, it was bought for God — "you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body."
A vow is easy to make. One writer traces how such promises collapse.
It is one thing, as all know, to vow, and another to perform. Some powerful influence takes hold of us and shuts out everything except the one thing set before our souls. In that moment it is easy to bind ourselves to pursue that one object for ever. The influence passes away, and, while the object which had been before us seems as desirable as ever, the impulse to reach it is no longer felt. Along with this loss of power, the flesh reasserts itself. In the end the "covenant" that seemed so easy to keep when we made it becomes impossible, and adds another burden to an already bad conscience.
- Redeemed. God spared Israel's firstborn in Egypt through the blood at the Passover. Every firstborn brought to the priests later acknowledged that rescue.
- Owned. Rescue was not the end. God bought the firstborn for Himself, and the same claim rests on everyone He redeems.
- First. God's portion is the opening of the womb and the first of the produce, never what is left over.
- Brought. They proved the claim by bringing sons, cattle, herds and flocks to the house, which supported those who served there.
- Kept. The vow was easy to make and impossible to keep. What we promise in a moment of strong feeling turns into another burden on the conscience.
and that we should bring the first-fruits of our coarse meal and our heave-offerings, and the fruit of all manner of trees, new wine and oil, to the priests, into the chambers of the house of our God, and the tithes of our ground to the Levites, that they, the Levites, should take the tithes in all the cities of our tillage.
This verse sits inside a written pledge that the returned exiles signed after they heard the law read aloud and confessed their sins. It lists what farm and household owed to the temple, and to whom — and behind that list stands a plain question: who pays for the service of God's house?
Nehemiah's own work had been rebuilding Jerusalem's wall. Yet the covenant that closes this chapter never mentions walls and gates. It points the people to the house of God instead.
The great test of faithfulness was the upkeep of the house, the support of those who served in it, and obedience to — and agreement with — the principles of divine order which the house always stood for as reminder and symbol... The people inside the city and the people outside it — the whole people — showed by their signatures that they meant to do the will of God, and pledged their support to the house rather than to the wall... So families, cattle, fruits, harvests and vintage were all to give from the country to the house, as a recognition of God, and for the support of the priests, Levites, singers and gatekeepers.
The word "first" runs through the list: the first of the dough, before the household ate any of it. Giving the first of a crop said where the crop came from. It also explains how these gifts reached the priests.
Enjoying those fruits of the goodness of God, the people gave Him back the firstfruits, as a testimony that all came from Him, and that all was His, and that His grace had given it to them... Therefore the firstfruits were not for the people to eat: they offered them to God, and ate of all the rest. It was the recognition of God, while sharing His blessings. So the people offered the firstfruits to God, and they passed into the hands of the priests as their portion.
The wine and the oil named here were not leftovers from the season. The law asked for the best.
When God provided for the support of the priests, besides parts of the various offerings, it was written: "All the best of the oil and all the best of the wine and of the grain, the firstfruits of what they give to the LORD, I give to you" (Num. 18:12). This is another example that the first and best of all we are and have should be given to God. When we weigh up our own state, hardly any question matters more than this: do we make a habit of giving God our first and best?
The verse splits the giving in two. Firstfruits go to the priests; tithes of the ground go to the Levites. Neither group farmed for a living, and the storerooms named here are where it all went.
All the work of the house of God fell to the Levites, except the duties that belonged to the priests alone, and the tithes the people paid provided for their support... Now the people remember all this. In their zeal to restore the law they take these duties on themselves, so that the service of the house of their God may be properly kept up. The firstfruits for the priests, as well as the tithes for the Levites, were to be stored in the chambers of the house. (1 Chr. 9:26-33.)
The second half of the verse notes that the Levites went out and collected the tithes in the farming towns. Later in the book that system breaks down, and the breakdown follows a pattern.
The Levites and singers were set apart entirely for the sacred service of the house. God Himself had placed the cost of their keep on the people, and the people had accepted it. But under the influence of Eliashib they lost all sense of the holiness of the house. Then they forgot their responsibilities, and the servants of the Lord in His house had to fall back on the ordinary way of earning a living — "they fled every man to his field." The same thing is often seen in the Church... whenever decline sets in, and believers become worldly, the workers are forgotten.
The people meant what they wrote. The pledge did not hold for long.
These were good intentions. But soon afterwards, in the Book of Malachi, God asks Israel, "Will a man rob God? Yet you have robbed Me! But you say, In what way have we robbed You? In tithes and offerings" (Mal. 3:8). So Malachi shows how far Israel had turned from this covenant made in Nehemiah's time.
- First — the dough, fruit, wine and oil go to God before the household takes its share. The first portion says that everything came from Him.
- Best — the law asked for the best of the oil and wine. The test is not whether we give, but whether we give our first and best.
- Through — what we give to God does not stay at the altar. It goes into the storerooms and feeds the priests and Levites, who have no other income.
- Upkeep — the pledge covers the house, not the wall. Caring for those who serve there is the real test of faithfulness.
- Forgotten — when respect for the house fades, the giving stops and the servants go back to their fields. Malachi calls that robbing God.
And the priest the son of Aaron shall be with the Levites, when the Levites take tithes; and the Levites shall bring up the tithe of the tithes to the house of our God, into the chambers of the treasure-house.
Nehemiah 10:38 closes a written promise the returned exiles signed after hearing God's law read aloud. It raises a question far bigger than ancient Jerusalem: what does a person who lives on the gifts of others owe to God, and what happens when the storerooms run dry?
The Levites lived on the tithe the other tribes brought in. That raised a question about what they themselves owed.
However, though the Levites received tithes, they were not exempt from paying tithes. When the other tribes brought in their tithes, the Levites were to offer God a heave offering of one tenth of those tithes.
The priest named in this verse is a son of Aaron. One writer shows which share reached him.
The tithe was for the Levites, not for the priests except a tithe of the tithe given by the Levites to Aaron.
The Levite did not give from what was left over after he had fed his household. The order ran the other way.
These tithes were to come from the best of what the Levites received. That is an important principle for us, for the Lord is always worthy of the best. Only then were the Levites free to use the rest as food for themselves and their households.
The tithe was never just a deal between two groups of Israelites. One writer tests that with a question put to each side.
If one asked the children of Israel, To whom do you give the tithes? the answer of the godly would be, We give them to the Lord. And if one asked the faithful Levites, From whom do you receive the tithes? their answer would be, We receive them from the Lord.
A tithe of a tithe is a small sum next to the harvest of a whole nation. God's valuation of it is the surprise.
It is very precious in all this to see how those who have little stand before God in their offerings together with those who have much. The Levites had a smaller offering for the Lord than the children of Israel. The one had the tithes of the fullness of the land; the other had only the tithe of the tithe for their offering. But of it the Lord said, "And this your heave offering shall be reckoned to you, as though it were the corn of the threshing floor, and as the fullness of the winepress." The Lord accepted them according to what they had, and not according to what they had not. And so, when the poor widow put in her two small coins to the offering of God, although many rich people put in much, Christ judged that she had put in more than all of them.
The storerooms named at the end of the verse fed the men who ran the house of God.
All the work of the house of God fell to them, except the duties that belonged only to the priests. Their support came from the tithes required of the people. Both the priests and the Levites were to live on the offerings of the people... The people, in their zeal to restore the law, take on these responsibilities themselves, so that the service of the house of their God would be properly established.
The promise did not hold. One writer follows what happened next.
The tithes had been neglected, because there was no more room to store them. The Levites and the singers therefore lacked what they needed to live on, and each one had fled to his own field. Because the Levites were missing, the service of the house of God suffered. This one sin brought consequences beyond measure for what was the very centre of the people's religious life.
Commentators point out that the fixed tenth no longer applies, though the giving has not stopped.
In our present day of grace there is no law about tithing. Instead the measure of our giving is "as he may prosper" (1 Cor. 16:2) or "as he purposes in his heart" (2 Cor. 9:7). The amount is left to each believer to settle with God... The Lord's servant is to care about using money for the Lord's sake just as much as they do, and be glad to give as the Lord prospers him.
- Receive — the Levites lived on what the other tribes brought, and they took it as from the Lord.
- Return — receiving did not excuse them from giving; a tenth of the tenth went back to God's house.
- Best — that portion came off the top, from the best, before the household used the rest.
- Reckoned — God counted the smaller gift as full; He measures by what you have, not by what you lack.
- Guard — when the tithes stopped, the Levites went back to their fields and the service of God's house broke down.
For the children of Israel and the children of Levi shall bring the heave-offering of the corn, of the new wine and the oil, into the chambers, where are the vessels of the sanctuary, and the priests that minister, and the doorkeepers and the singers. And we will not forsake the house of our God.
The covenant that began with the reading of the law ends here. Grain, wine and oil go into the temple storerooms, and one last line promises that God's house will not be neglected. Everything the people agreed to now rests on that line, and the rest of the book shows what became of it.
The pledge is the fourth and final heading of a written agreement. One commentator sets out the whole shape of it:
1st. As to their personal walk, that it should be in obedience to the law of God given by Moses (29). 2nd. As to the nations around, they would maintain a holy separation (30). 3rd. As to Jehovah, they would give Him His due with devotion, keeping the Sabbath, the holy days, and the law of the seventh year (31). 4th. As to the house of God, they charge themselves to maintain the service and not forsake the house (32-39).
The produce did not decorate the building. It fed the men whose whole work was the house of God, and the chambers named in the verse held it:
God gave the Levites to Aaron, in the place of the firstborn, to be offered "before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel, that they may execute the service of the Lord." (Num. 8:11) All the work of the house of God fell to them, except the duties that belonged to the priests alone. Their support came from the tithes laid on the people. The offerings of the people were to feed both the priests and the Levites, and the law had prescribed exactly what those offerings should be. (See Num. 18) The firstfruits for the priests, and the tithes for the Levites, belonged in the chambers of the house. (1 Chr. 9:26-33)
What the ESV calls the "contribution" is the heave offering. Several different gifts carried that name, and they had one thing in common:
The heave offering included the right shoulder of the peace offering… the first of the dough (Num. 15:20), and the tithes (Num. 18:24), including the corn, wine, and oil for the priests' use. (Neh. 10:39)… These offerings differ from one another, but they share one feature. Each is a portion taken out of what remains, whether of fruits, animals, money, or land. That is why they are all called heave offerings.
Verse 39 records no argument about who pays what. One writer traces that ease to two things: real fellowship, and one aim:
For the firstfruits and tithes, they only had to follow what was plainly "written in the law". In all this they acted with one accord. Everything appears simple and easy when there is communion between brothers, and when their one motive for acting is the service of the house of God (v. 39).
This was the second temple. The visible glory of the first temple was gone, and the people knew it. That makes their promise more striking, not less:
"The house of our God" was precious even to those who knew the glory was no longer there. Such and more should be the name of Jesus, now that we are built together for God's habitation in the Spirit — the Spirit of truth given to be with us forever.
The people meant every word, and that is where the difficulty starts. Older translations read "forsake" here where the ESV reads "neglect":
They closed the last part of the covenant with the words, "And we will not forsake the house of our God." We cannot doubt that they meant it… But, as everyone knows, it is one thing to vow and another to perform. Some powerful influence moves us and shuts out everything except the one thing then set before our souls. At such a moment it is easy to bind ourselves to pursue that one object forever. Then the influence passes away. The object seems as desirable as ever, but we no longer feel the impulse to reach it. With that loss of power the flesh takes back its place, the covenant becomes impossible to keep, and it adds one more burden to a conscience already bad.
The promise did not hold, and the sign of that was practical:
It dishonoured Him when the Levites had to go back to their fields. That proved His house was forsaken, and that His servants had nothing to live on.
- Covenant. The pledge not to neglect God's house closes a four-part agreement. The other parts cover personal walk, separation from the nations, and God's own days.
- Contribution. The grain, wine and oil are heave offerings — portions taken out of what the giver already had.
- Care. Those portions fed the priests and Levites. They carried all the work of the house, and the law gave them no other income.
- Concord. The giving went without friction. Fellowship was real, and one motive ruled: the service of the house of God.
- Cost. Sincere vows rarely outlive the feeling that produced them. When the storerooms emptied, the Levites went back to their fields, and that proved the house was forsaken.