Should Christians today give a first-fruits offering?

from the old testament

• God required the Israelites to give a first-fruits offering (Exodus 23:19; Leviticus 23:10; Proverbs 3:9-10).
• The most comprehensive passage about the first-fruits offering is found in Deuteronomy 26, which explains that the purpose of it was to acknowledge how God took the Israelites down to Egypt, multiplied their number, released them, and gave them the land of Canaan for an inheritance. Canaan was a fertile land that was already settled by people who did horrible things like sacrifice their children. For their sin, God had the Israelites destroy the Canaanites, and then He gave the Israelites the land.
• The offering was brought to the temple where it was displayed before God and then given to the priests for their sustenance (Numbers 18:11-12).
• Proverbs 3:9-10 says that offering first fruits will bring blessings, but it's unclear if this is a general proverb or a specific promise of God to His people; in most appearances, first fruits is associated with thanks to God for bringing the Israelites from Egypt to Canaan.
• The law is somewhat vague and has been subject to rabbinic interpretation. For instance, Scripture does not dictate how much the first-fruits offering should be in comparison to the harvest. Leviticus 23:17 mentions two loaves of bread for an offering for wheat, but rabbinic custom stated the minimum offering should be 1/60th of the harvest, although this is not in the Bible.
• The term "first fruits" is used in another, somewhat metaphorical way in the Old Testament. It refers to the firstborn son of each human male or female animal. All firstborn males belonged to God, but depending on the species, they could be redeemed—that is, a sacrifice could be made so they could stay. God provided the redemption for the "first fruit" sons by taking the Levites for Himself to care for the tabernacle and the temple (Numbers 3:12).
• The firstborn male of each female herd animal had different standards depending on what they were (Exodus 13:12). For instance, a firstborn male donkey could be redeemed by donating a lamb (Exodus 13:13), but cows, sheep, and goats were to be sacrificed (Numbers 18:17). Use of "first fruits" in this manner does not directly relate to the first-fruits offering. The firstborn animals were dedicated in remembrance of God taking all the firstborns of men and animals in Egypt while the first fruits produced were given in remembrance of God providing for Israel in Canaan.

from the new testament

• Romans 8:23 states "And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit…" As in other passages, Paul is using "first fruits" as a metaphor for the first appearance of a promised blessing. Here, it is the Holy Spirit, the "helper" who Jesus promised in John 14:26. The very first followers of Jesus received the "first fruits" of the Holy Spirit's work in the lives of believers.
• Romans 11:16’s phrasing is odd, but it's believed that the "dough" refers to the first Jewish Christians and the "whole lump" to Jews in general, meaning that God has not abandoned the Jewish nation indefinitely. If the first Jewish Christians were redeemable, then the Gentiles needed to remember that every Jew is redeemable. "First fruits" is used as a metaphor to mean the first part of the harvest of Jewish souls that are to be saved through Christ's sacrifice.
• First Corinthians 15:20 and 23 refer to Jesus as the "firstfruits" of those who will be raised from the dead. He is the firstborn Son of the Father, and His resurrection is the first of the promise that all who follow Him will also be raised. He is a guarantee of our future blessing.
• Second Thessalonians 2:13 and James 1:18 call New Testament saints "firstfruits." They were the first to follow Christ and act as a promise that there will be more to come. In fact, James 1:18 infers that the Christians in the early church were the "firstfruits" of all of creation and the promise that creation itself will be restored.
• The final mention of firstfruits in the Bible is in Revelation 14:4 and speaks of the 144,000 Jewish witnesses who will spread the Gospel during the Tribulation. They will have a special role in Heaven and are claimed by God and Jesus as special representatives of those who are saved.

implications for today

The problem with applying the concept of the first-fruits offering today is that the first-fruits offering was for the Jews for a specific purpose. Nowhere does the New Testament mention that the church is required or even encouraged to give a "first-fruits offering." Like tithing, giving to the church is left up to the personal convictions of the individual believer. There is no blanket policy for giving. As far as the first fruit offering as described in the Old Testament, the church is exempt. Jesus did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it—including being the first fruit, Himself (1 Corinthians 15:20). “First fruit” in the church age means that those who were saved in the early church were a promise that more would follow. Jesus' resurrection is a promise that we, too, will be resurrected. Any other use of "first fruits" is either abusive or careless.

This presumes that the work of God be understood in a dispensational manner instead of following the teaching of replacement theology. Replacement theology teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God's plan for the world. All of the promises God gave Israel (including material blessings for obedience) are transferred to the church. Dispensational theology claims that God gave Israel and the church different promises, and many of Israel's promises will not come to fruition until the millennial kingdom. Got Questions Ministry believes that dispensational theology best interprets the Scriptures. The church cannot claim all the promises God made to Israel in the Old Testament.

That doesn't mean that giving a first-fruits offering is bad in and of itself. Like the term (or even the practice) "tithing," "first fruit" can be shorthand for "voluntary offering given in thanks or faith." There's nothing wrong with giving above and beyond what is regularly budgeted for—as long as the motivation is personal and not pressured by church leadership.

To say that "laying down a seed" so that God will make someone rich, or that you can pay off God to bless future plans, is an abusive lie from adherents of the prosperity gospel. To give sacrificially is to follow in the example of the widow of Mark 12:41-44 and is commendable as long as it isn't coerced. To give an offering in thanks that God provided is perfectly acceptable. But if a church wants to have a period of fund-raising, it would be better to have a specific purpose and not just try to spiritualize the desire to have more capital in the bank. The New Testament says we are to give in faith, but it doesn't say that we are to give to the point of destitution so that our faith can grow (1 Corinthians 16:2). There is a difference between faithful sacrifice and bad resource management.

God wants all of us (Romans 12:1). Every monetary blessing we have is His, and we should do with it as He leads—whether to use on ourselves or to use for others. Matthew 25:14-30 tells us that we should be responsible with His blessings. This would include giving for a purpose, giving by the leading of the Bible and the Holy Spirit, giving for the spread of the Gospel and the aid of the needy, and giving cheerfully. Whatever you choose to call that, it's simply Christian giving.