ALFRED
EDERSHEIM QUOTES FROM MY WRITINGS:
Google:
The Widow’s Mite, Russ Kelly for this article.
From:
The Temple, Its Ministry and Services As
They Were At the Time of Christ, Alfred Edersheim, D. D., Ph. D. died 1889,
p48-49.
13
TREASURY CHESTS CALLED TRUMPETS
#1
thru #8 Mandatory Giving
#1
and #2 were for the half shekel Temple tribute.
#3:
For women who had to bring doves [after their issues of blood and childbirth].
They dropped the equivalent in money and that many doves were offered daily.
Mary used this when she met Simeon.
#4:
Also received the value of the offerings of young pigeons.
#5:
To buy the wood used in the Temple.
#6:
To buy incense used in the Temple.
#7:
To buy golden vessels for Temple ministry.
#8:
For excess money after buying sin offerings.
--------------
#9
thru #13 Voluntary Giving
#9,
#10, #11, #12, #13: For excess money after buying trespass offerings, offerings
of birds, the offering of the Nazarite, of the cleansed leper and voluntary
offerings.
(p379)
“And it is remarkable that the law seemed to regard Israel as intended to be
only an agricultural people --- no contribution being provided for [tithes]
from trade or merchandise.”
STCTT
p12; The Temple, ch 19, p379 softback
Alfred Edersheim: “And it is
remarkable, that the Law seems to regard Israel as intended to be only an
agricultural people—no contribution being provided for from trade or
merchandise.”
STCTT, P42, CH5; Sketches,
p18-19
Tithes originally
could come from any part of the land of Israel used by Israelites. However,
Alfred Edersheim states that this requirement later was made much more narrow
rather than being expanded [Preachers expanded the definition; the Jews limited
the meaning.] After the return from exile, the land was subdivided into three
different zones of holiness. The second and third tithe could not come to the
temple from land beyond the Jordan. While Israelite land which had been
captured by King David [O.K.], parts of Egypt [not biblical], and part of
Babylon [not biblical] could be used for lesser tithes to local Levites, most
other land was considered defiled and incapable of producing acceptable holy
tithes for the temple in Jerusalem.
STCTT, ch8, p57; Sketches p18-19
In Sketches of Jewish Social Life, Old Testament and Hebrew scholar, Alfred
Edersheim devoted the first two chapters to discussions of the holy land of
Israel which are well worth reading. After the exile, the country was subdivided
into three different zones of "holiness." Only tithes from the most
holy land-zone could be brought to the temple. Tithes from lesser holy land
zones within Israel could provide for local shrines and the poor. However,
since even the "dust" from pagan Gentile lands defiled, it is certain
that no temple tithe could come from "defiled" ground.
STCTT, ch9, p63; The Temple,
p378
Concerning the
gleaning law, Edersheim wrote, "Bicurim, terumoth, and what was to be left
in the corners of the fields for the poor were always set apart before the
tithing was made." He added that a poor person with less than five sheep
was not required to bring the firstfruits of the fleece. Certainly the poor did
not tithe from gleanings!
STCTT, ch14, p117-118; Sketches
52, 215
The Pharisees
were hypocrites concerning 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 Pharisee paid less
tithes in two different ways than others who did not boast.
STCTT, ch22, p185; The Temple,
p102-103
According to Edersheim, priests received income from 24 sources and
their tenth of the tithe was one of the least.
STCTT, ch22, p195; Sketches 169,
172, 173
“Thus…to come to the subject of this chapter…we now
understand how so many of the disciples and followers of the Lord gained their
living by some craft; how in the same spirit the Master Himself condescended to
the trade of his adoptive father; and how the greatest of his apostles
throughout earned his bread through the labor of his hands, probably following,
like the Lord Jesus, the trade of his father. For it was a principle,
frequently expressed, if possible ‘not to forsake the trade of the father’” (p.
169). Furthermore, although its origins is unknown, Roman law required that a
son should follow in the trade of his father (per the life of Martin, an early
monk).
“And this same love of honest labor, the same spirit of
manly independence, the same horror of trafficking with the law, and
using it either as a ‘crown or as a spade,’ was certainly characteristic of the
best Rabbis” (p. 172).
“For, in point of fact, with few exceptions, all the
leading Rabbinical authorities were working at some trade, till at last it
became quite an affectation to engage in hard bodily labor…” (p. 173).
………………………………………
STCTT, ch29, p247; The
Temple, ch19
A noted
authority on Judaism, Alfred Edersheim, gives several important points which
prove that tithing did not exist in the early centuries of the church. He
reminds us of the Jewish customs which were surely followed by at least the
Jewish-Christian apostles and disciples. First, tithing was not universal, even
in Israel, because it did not apply to crafts and trades, “And it is remarkable, that
the law seems to regard Israel as intended to be only an agricultural people—no
contribution being provided for from trade or merchandise.”
STCTT, ch29, p248; Sketches 15-17, 118, 172-173
Second, proper tithes
could only come from the holy lands of Israel (p. 15-17). Third, most Jews
considered it a sin to make a profit from teaching the law, “Then, as for the
occupation of ordinary life, it was indeed quite true that every Jew was bound
to learn some trade or business. But this was not to divert him from study;
quite the contrary. It was regarded as a profanation—or at least declared
such—to make use of one’s learning for secular purposes, whether of gain or of
honor. The great Hillel had it (Ab. I. 13); ‘He who serves himself by the
crown [the Torah] shall fade away’” (p. 118). Fourth, rabbis, such as Paul, were not
expected to earn a living from teaching the law, “For, in point of fact,
with few exceptions, all the leading Rabbinical authorities were working at
some trade, till at last it became quite an affectation to engage in hard
bodily labor…” (p. 173). And, fifth, honest labor was considered a
cherished virtue, “And this same love of honest labor, the same spirit of manly
independence, the same horror of trafficking with the law, and using it
either as a ‘crown or as a spade,’ was certainly characteristic of the best
Rabbis.” (p. 172).[1][2] Edersheim leaves no room in his conclusions for any
idea that rabbis might have taught God’s Law to provide for their own financial
sustenance. This very strong tradition among Jews certainly would have been
extended into the Jewish Christian church by former Jewish rabbis such as Paul.
STCTT, ch29, p250; Sketches 169
Alfred Edersheim (Anglican), in his book,
Sketches of Jewish Social Life, devoted an entire chapter to the Jewish
work ethic. “Thus…to come to the subject of this chapter…we now understand how
so many of the disciples and followers of the Lord gained their living by
some craft; how in the same spirit the Master Himself condescended to the trade
of his adoptive father; and how the greatest of his apostles throughout earned
his bread through the labor of his hands, probably following, like the Lord
Jesus, the trade of his father. For it was a principle, frequently
expressed, if possible ‘not to forsake the trade of the father.’”
