The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1916-06-29

they which preach the gospel should
live of the gospel" DR.. Burns spoke
in part as follows:
"If Gcd has plan for financing
His church the sooner We discover it
the better. How to finance the church
and its departments has been, perhaps
its greatest problem. Is it reasonable
to presume that the Lord would have
established such an important insti-
tuition without a definite financial
plan? God has always been so accu-
rate and certain in all His ways. If
the founders of the Restoration
Movement" had laid as much stress
on Gods way of financing His church
as they did on other things, the
church would be a more important
factor in the world today. They have
said, "Where the Scriptures speak we
speak, and where the Scriptures are
silent we are silent" and at the same
time have overlooked the Scriptural
plan of financing the work of the
church. We propose in this sermon
to give the Scriptural plan of the Ola
Testament and prove that the same
was carried over into the New Testa-
ment.
"The common objection made by
our people to tithing is that it was a
provision of the law of Moses and that
the system was not carried over into
the New Testament and as we are
the New Testament church we are
under no obligation to conform to it..
The same objection might as well be
made to the commandment, Thou
shalt not steal However, the tithing
system did not originate by the law
of Moses. 1t was known before his
time. Both Abraham and Jacob rec
ognized it. Abraham gave the tenth
to Gods king and priest, Melchizedek
(Gen. 14:19-20) and Jacobs vow was
of all that thou shalt give me, will
surely give the tenth unto thee (Gen
2S:22). Strange vow if he had not
known that twas Gods will. The
reason why God should have accepted
Abels offering and not Gains has
been a problem to many. Some have
said it was because Abers offering
was of the flock and Gains of the
feld-the one an offering of blood and
the other not. But God did accept,
under the Mosaic law, offerings of the
OIL wine, etc. SO there
must be some mistake about this con-
tention. The Septuag1nt of Genesis
Al is If thou hast offered Alright but
hast not divided Alright, hast thou not
This implies that God was
not displeased with the kind of of
fering that Cain made but with the
quantity of it. In Hebrews 11:4 we
are told that by faith Abel offered
unto God a more excellent sacrifice
Illdu Odlu. L he bItth NOIu lOI CA
cellent' is fuller James Moffat in
The New Translation of the New Tes-
lament translates the passage, 1t was
by faith that Abel offered God rich
er sacrifice than Cain did, God must
have indicated to Adam in the be
ginning that the tithe was His just
as the seventh day was His. and
Gains offering was not respected
because out of a covetous heart he
withheld from Jehovah a part of what
had been commanded
Christ never abrogated the law of
the 1.-THE. 1t is said that Jesus de
voted one-fourth of His teaching to
money. One verse out of every four
in Matthew, Mark and Luke is on
money, yet in all His teaching He did
not abrogate the titne. He differed
with Moses in some of his other laws
but did not differ on the tithe. 'Ye
1.-THE mint anise and cummin, and
have left undone the weightier mat
ters of the law, justice, mercy and
faith; but these We ought to have done
and not to have left the others un-