The Eccentric God 2

Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? (John 8:48)

I want us to continue looking at God and His ways.

To a Jew, a Samaritan was probably the most despised person. No Jew ever wanted to be associated with them.

It is even said that among some of the most present thanksgiving items for a Jew was that he was not a Samaritan. No wonder they were at this point calling Christ a Samaritan with a demon.

But that is not the way God operated. And I will give us a few instances where He overturned their perception.

Do you know that it is the Samaritans that welcomed Him and without reservation received His teaching. Do you realise that the first evangelist was a Samaritan woman, and a serial divorcee for that?

And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did. So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. And many more believed because of his own word; And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world. (John 4: 39 – 42)

And this when all around the Jewish nation people were always disputing with Him and asking for the source of His authority.

It is also said that even passing through Samaria was an abomination of sorts. Jews would take a much longer route from one part of Israel to another to avoid the defilement they feared they could have got from the Samaritan nation. Yet Jesus not only passed through there, He bought food from them and even preached to them.

Remember the ten lepers who were cleansed and only one overflowed with gratitude? He was also a Samaritan.

But probably the most striking of the stories is the one He used to describe a neighbour.

How dare Christ use an abomination to describe kindness?

But that is how God operates.

For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. (1Corinthians 1: 26 – 29)

We need to come to the realisation that God will never do things in ways we either understand or approve. He is God all the time and not subject to His creation, even the crown of that creation.

Even today God will use people we think are outside His frame of operation for the same reason.

He will still use that divorcee as an evangelist to bring the corrupt and neglected populace to the saving knowledge of Christ.

I am sure Jesus passed through Samaria because He knew there were hearts seeking Him, though they did not know it.

He also knew that nobody could have gone there to take the Gospel to them.

I am also sure that His disciples only went there because Jesus was Boss. Or why were they wondering why He was speaking to that woman?

Those gangs need the Gospel. Those drug peddlers and addicts need the Gospel preached to them. Those harlots need the Gospel explained to them with the right tone, the tone of love and concern.

Do we have that love? Are we concerned that Christ also died for them and wants them saved?

These verses speak about the Samaritans too.

He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1: 11 – 13)

And they speak about the untouchables, the undesirables, the rejects.

Will you adopt God’s eccentricities in your ministry? Will you start seeing positive things about those people completely outside your acceptable?

The Eccentric God

But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land; But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow. And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian. And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath, (Luke 4: 25 – 28)

Jesus was very offensive to many of the people following Him.

I was listening to the time a Pharisee invited Him for lunch and instead of praising Him started saying very bad things about their religion. Can you imagine hearing something like this from a guest you have made a personal invitation for lunch?

And as he spake, a certain Pharisee besought him to dine with him: and he went in, and sat down to meat. And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he had not first washed before dinner. And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness. Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also? (Luke 11: 37 – 40)

If that is not rudeness, then we ought to come up with a new dictionary.

But that is how God operates.

I want us to look at a few other eccentricities in the scriptures to appreciate what I am saying.

Ever wondered why God took the loser to heaven and the visibly successful to hell? Or what does the story of the rich man and Lazarus teach?

As I write I remember in our hood there is such a one who has defied age. He should be in the region of the late seventies but never shows it since I have seen him that way since my childhood.

But he is a sloth. He does nothing, not even bathing.

Yet he is always present when someone has a party or visitors.

But he never demands anything after getting something to eat. And you can have a normal conversation with him and so he appears normal, and very polite.

Many neighbours would speak very roughly to him when he would appear, openly wondering why a visibly strong and healthy man did not work yet the family he comes from is as normal as any other. Some would even deny him food, some even asking him to go work their farms to earn the food he was demanding.

To imagine this loafer getting to heaven and people who have built churches and done so much good in society appears like an abomination.

Incidentally, in most, probably all the places I have spent substantial time there has been at least one such loafer whose life defied logic.

We realise also that Lazarus was called a beggar, meaning that he lived off other people’s sweat.

Yet isn’t that the thrust of the parable?

God is not like us. No wonder we call Him holy.

But that is not the only eccentricity we see with God. The Bible is so full of that nature unique to God.

Allow me to stop here to allow us to reflect.

I will build on other situations that baffle us yet are normal with God.

I will not even ask any application questions for the same purpose. I want us to reflect and ask God to open our eyes to the Lazarus by our gates.

Enslaved Freedom

And the Philistine drew near morning and evening, and presented himself forty days. (1Samuel 17:16)

What do you do with hemmed options?

Can there be any freedom in captivity?

I want us to look at this aspect in our spiritual lives.

The truth is that Israel had enough options out of the dilemma that was Goliath.

You see, he was just one giant.

And Israel had archers and slingers who were extremely accurate for a long time. Sample this

Among all this people there were seven hundred chosen men lefthanded; every one could sling stones at an hair breadth, and not miss. (Judges 20:16)

As we know that was something many people would aspire for since childhood. Meaning that in Saul’s army there must have been a sample of such.

Would the best option not have been to target that giant and take him off for there to be a level playing field?

Or they could have decided to refuse that offer and join the battle man to man.

But that was not the object of Goliath’s challenge.

His challenge was to cripple Israel to the point that they felt completely boxed in and had no options but the one they would be offered in their desperation.

It would be in order if I gave you similar situations.

And the elders of Jabesh said unto him, Give us seven days' respite, that we may send messengers unto all the coasts of Israel: and then, if there be no man to save us, we will come out to thee. (1Samuel 11:3)

Do you think the Ammonite army were offering Jabesh Gilead those seven days because they cared for fairness?

Of course not. They were confident that no help would be forthcoming. They were in actual fact fattening their prey by offering that option, only that it backfired.

Now as soon as this letter cometh to you, seeing your master's sons are with you, and there are with you chariots and horses, a fenced city also, and armour; Look even out the best and meetest of your master's sons, and set him on his father's throne, and fight for your master's house. (2Kings 10: 2, 3)

That was the same with this challenge.

One party is pretending to play fair when they are playing the foulest by using a very subtle weapon, intimidation.

And there are so many instances in the scriptures and in real life where this tactic has been successfully used.

In fact, there are very few instances of it failing. And they fail when a new element is introduced like David was in this.

Why did Goliath not tire at presenting himself for forty days?

That was the game plan.

The longer he stayed, the easier it would have been for his army to get a neater package at surrender without a single drop of blood being shed.

This because the army had been so fixated at that single object that it had stopped thinking. Or even praying. Or hoping.

And all the men of Israel, when they saw the man, fled from him, and were sore afraid. (1Samuel 17:24)

And Saul said to David, Thou art not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him: for thou art but a youth, and he a man of war from his youth. (1Samuel 17:33)

You wonder what they were doing on the war front in the first place.

A whole army runs away from a single man. Then the king confesses that David simply could not kill him. What then was Israel waiting for? Or even hoping for?

Until you realise that that was the strategy of the Philistine army.

Israel was vanquished so completely even before the armies could join arms as happened in the other examples I cited.

That was the power of those forty days.

It was just a matter of time before the whole army crawled on their knees in surrender under any terms the victor set. A victor who had not lifted any arm.

You see, intimidation does not rely on the facts at hand.

It is like an amplifier that takes a feeble sound and makes it so loud that other sounds appear nonexistent. Or like a lens that will focus one’s eyes on a single microscopic or nanoscopic microbe that nothing else can be seen.

Intimidation pretends to give options when in actual fact it is doing the opposite, locking out any options that may be available. It simply blocks the mind from thinking and the heart from hoping. And the spirit from believing.

Since this is a spiritual warfare post, allow me to get into the spiritual aspects by taking us to the classic example.

Remember Samson?

Do you think he was unaware that Delila was looking to sell him to her people?

I am sure he knew the consequences of his leaking his secret as he implied when leaking it.

But look at this.

And it came to pass, when she pressed him daily with her words, and urged him, so that his soul was vexed unto death; (Judges 16:16)

Delila swamped him with her ‘love’ and hemmed her in with her acts of devotion.

It is at that point that she then asked him where his heart was, who had his love.

And we know that it was not for a day or two, or even a week or two.

She caged him so effectively that he saw that death was preferable to the options Delila was offering.

No wonder he succumbed.

But he could have walked away. I know someone is saying.

We know he was not locked up in any way. He was free to go and come as he pleased, or at least he thought so.

Saul also could have faced Goliath since he was closest to his height. Or he could have sent someone more skilled to do so as we see here.

And he slew an Egyptian, a goodly man: and the Egyptian had a spear in his hand; but he went down to him with a staff, and plucked the spear out of the Egyptian's hand, and slew him with his own spear. (2Samuel 23:21)

But that is not how intimidation operates.

Ask anyone who has fallen prey to the snare of illicit sex. Or the one who became unequally yoked with an unbeliever. Or the one who compromised their faith for this or the other. Or the one who drowned in drugs.

Rather than say I would rather die than sin, intimidation leaves the option it left in these instances.

Let me sin and die. Since that is what Samson did. And that is what Goliath wanted Israel to do.

Incidentally that is what the devil seeks to do with every one of God’s disciples.

Remember that is what Job’s wife offered him?

That you are in a relationship to die for may mean you are on the throes of spiritual death because even your faith is caged by that relationship.

That you are in a job that means the world to you may actually mean that you lost your faith long ago and are just waiting for the pin that will prick that balloon you call faith.

No wonder Christ said this

If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. (Luke 14:26)

He knew the entanglements possible when He is not the ultimate and only prize in our pursuit.

What is nagging?

It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman in a wide house. It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman. (Proverbs 21: 19, 29)

That is one aspect of intimidation many of us know. It is what happened to Solomon. And it is what Goliath was doing to Israel.

I do not know whether you know that spousal battery operates at that level.

This is because you will realise that many of the battered are not actually weaklings physically.

I remember an incident where a soldier of that crack paramilitary unit endured the battery of his wife.

A man who could effectively bring a whole village to submission alone was being battered by his wife who had no such training.

The reality is that long before the battery, there had to be intense intimidation in the spiritual realm that this war machine was completely emasculated before his feebler wife.

I also remember a neighbor who was battered to death by his wife who did not look like she could harm much from her frame. And I learnt of it because she had knocked him so badly on the market in the presence of their customers. I heard onlookers wondering what kind of man he was to allow such a weakly looking woman to beat him.

The truth is that the two men I have mentioned succumbed to intimidation in the spiritual long before their physical was attacked. Like Samson, the spiritual was battered to death.

But I want us to remember that this is a post about spiritual warfare and not domestic violence.

I am using these examples to open our eyes to spiritual realities involved in such issues.

Allow me to say something else.

Those situations do not just come around. We can easily see them as the culmination of a long and persistent weakening of someone’s spiritual resolve.

Samson did not start with Delila. Delilah was the finisher of Samson’s compromised lifestyle.

Remember his parents protesting his delving into heathen relationships? Remember his doing a similar thing with the girl he was getting married to? Remember him visiting a heathen harlot?

And we see the same thing with Saul.

It is compromise that many times opens us to the intimidation of the enemy.

No wonder David could see through the bravado of the giant. Because he was not compromised.

Rarely, if ever, will a marriage just become violent.

Either the victim was caught pants down as is said or the other sought demonic intervention, which would also be facilitated by the compromise of the victim since the devil has no authority over someone he does not own.

Intimidation has at its foundation in the compromise of the victim, not the power of the intimidator.

I hope I am not taking us in circles.

But I wouldn’t mind the circles if the message can sink as deeply as God would have it.

What I am saying in the clearest way is that intimidation rarely if ever happens outside a compromise.

It therefore means that the safest we can be from the same is uncompromised obedience, or what I call radical obedience.

But understanding intimidation can guide us into examining our lives to see where it is we have compromised because rarely (again, if ever) will intimidation work with an obedient servant.

A case in point is Hezekiah before his backsliding.

The Assyrian army was not only stronger, bigger and better equipped than the Jewish one. They had a history of unquestioned conquest before they came to Jerusalem.

Their intimidation, instead of making the king cower in fear, drove him to prayer. And that because he had no issues with his relationship with God.

Then he could hear what God was saying because he had no bones he was trying to cover before God.

And it was the same with Jehoshaphat. An army too big to even think of fighting is destroyed because the king could hear God give orders, and follow them.

Am I saying anything?

 

Acceptable Rudeness

Then Daniel answered and said before the king, Let thy gifts be to thyself, and give thy rewards to another; yet I will read the writing unto the king, and make known to him the interpretation. (Daniel 5:17)

I have written about kings and the authority they wield.

Remember in Matthew 22 when people were slaughtered for refusing to attend a royal wedding?

Yet what we are seeing here appears way worse than just refusing to attend the wedding of a king’s son.

I want you to also contrast this to the same Daniel dealing with a similar situation in the previous chapter.

How does someone throw such words to a king? How does someone trash gifts from a king?

The context is the determinant.

Nebuchadnezzar was proud when God confronted him with that dream, just as Belshazzar is here.

But the father did not enjoy the revelation his son had. The elder did not have the history the younger had.

It is the difference between sin and rebellion as I wrote extensively some time ago.

Belshazzar had seen God in action against pride yet went ahead and poured scorn to the same God.

The prophet does not therefore come to a king bewildered by something he had no idea from whence it came as he had done to his father.

He therefore had no polite and respectful words for him.

And thou his son, O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest all this; (Daniel 5:22)

It therefore means that Belshazzar’s pride was a clear affront to God, meaning that God had no nice words for him.

It might appear as if Daniel was the one suffering from pride from his first sentence.

But Daniel was God’s servant and so had the fury the Divine had. He therefore spoke with the ire God had vested in him.

The fact of the matter is that the king had overshot his relevance in his blatant affront to God.

Whether he killed Daniel for insubordination or not was irrelevant for that moment since God had to speak as clearly as He could, not only to the rebellious king, but also to his audience.

That is why Daniel appears this rude.

And you remember Samuel doing the same with Saul when he rebelled.

That is also what we see when David is responding to Goliath’s blasphemy. That is what we see when Nathan is confronting David. That is what we see when Elijah is dealing with Ahab. That is what we see when John the Baptist is responding to the religious bigots of his time and even Herod the king. That is what we see when Jesus is speaking to the religious right. In fact that is why He whipped people out of the temple for turning His command into commerce.

There can be no nice words for pride and the resulting rebellion.

Yet it is important to know that God’s spokesmen are not always rude.

And I say this because some ‘prophets’ assume that they must offend to be relevant.

Nothing can be farther from the truth.

God pleads when need be. God soothes when that is what is required.

But God is firmly rude when the boundaries are blatantly breached.

God will thunder when goats find comfort in His tabernacle as we saw with Jesus. And this because they really have no business in the house called by His name.

It is therefore important to establish a context before talking about the prophet and his word.

Speaking politely to rebellion is sin. Comforting someone going through judgment is offensive to God who is seeking to restore the sinner through that pain.

I am among the ministers called wet blankets because we do not entertain the comfort of goats in a sheep enclosure. We are all the times castigated for bursting the many balloons and bubbles motivational preachers are unceasingly blowing.

We also love sharing nice and comforting messages. We are not allergic to motivation.

But it pains to realise that we could by that motivation be leading throngs to perdition because we are not confronting their sin.

That is why our message many times has to be like Daniel’s here.

It is the context that determines a minister’s response to whatever situation he encounters.

But it is important to realise that the said minister must be attuned to the heavenly frequency to be able to accurately and in a God-glorifying manner respond as the situation demands.

You see, five identical situations may present themselves to him that will require five different responses.

 A seeker will be experiencing discomfort or pain to draw him to seek God’s response and reception to reward their search.

A child will be undergoing the same for the purposes of God drawing him to seek a deeper relationship.

A sinner will be experiencing the same to open him to rebuke and correction.

A rebel will be undergoing the same as a punishment for his rebellion.

And the saint will be undergoing the same to remind him of the transient nature of the present and prompt him to desire heaven and live accordingly.

What is presented as a single circumstance will therefore demand a completely different set of responses from a minister.

What do you think will happen when a minister responds with a rebuke to the saint? Or worse, consolation to the rebellious?

I know it appears as if I am complicating issues. But it is because nothing in ministry is cut and dried for each and every situation just as God will never respond to His servants or even creation in a wholesale manner.

We will be judged by copying and pasting earlier successful methods of ministry because each and every situation is unique, requiring its own unique ministration.

Imitating success in ministry is as absurd as expecting a horse to thrive where an ass does or a racing car succeed where a military vehicle does.

That is why we read of God many times rebuking prophets for borrowing prophecies from each other.

By the way, even demonic manifestations are as unique as the demons manifesting.

We MUST be in a close relationship with God and through His word to be able to accurately know when and how we should minister and speak.

 

Gehazi’s Harvest 3

Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. (Acts 6:3)

What do we need to avoid Gehazi’s harvest?

In Gehazi’s situation, it was clear. He craved and went for it

Reading that story, you will realise that this general was carrying immense wealth.

And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment. (2Kings 5:5b)

Our friend’s error was not in seeing the treasure that was on offer for their ministry. It was not in thinking how much impact that wealth could have had on their ministry.

It was in wanting to possess some of it.

Allow me to go to Judas.

The value of that alabaster perfume was not the issue. Nor was it that it was poured since that was its purpose.

It was in wanting to have part of it as he had been having with part of the ministry support Christ had been receiving.

And like Gehazi he was unable to resist the bait. He was unable to hide his disappointment with having such wealth slide through his fingers even as Christ watched instead of intervening to allow him to sell it.

That is why he immediately went to the priests to ‘sell’ Jesus.

One thing is instructive here. It is the clear fact that whatever is given to a minister is intrinsically connected to the ministry the minister is involved in.

No minister is given personal gifts, even if it is a ticket to a holiday. Unless it is a bribe.

In the first century, people sold their lands and brought the proceeds at the apostles’ feet yet the apostles were not even close to the needs being administered as they had a very pivotal ministry.

Why did they choose the deacons and why did they transfer the reception of the gifts to them? Why did they transfer only the administration of the gifts to the seven?

It is because the apostles represented the church and her leadership. People, by giving to the apostles were giving to the church and in extension Christ who is the head of the church.

The apostles did not own the gifts that were being brought to their feet.

Look also at the Levites.

Contrary to modern tithe peddlers, the tithe was not the property of the Levites.

They were the managers of the same because they had been called from all other occupations to serve God in that aspect. And I will take us to the verse they have quoted bare.

Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it. (Malachi 3:10)

Surely God could not have talked about food in His house if it wholly belonged to the Levites.

It was also meant for the poor, the orphans and widows and even the refugees (aliens).

God therefore directed the giving to the Levites because they were best placed to minister to the needs in the community since He had excluded them from all other community duties.

Reminds me of a blunder I made because I did not have this revelation then.

There was a time I was given two cars and I refused to take them because I did not need them then.

And the givers were very disappointed when I rejected their offer however hard I tried to explain my position because they apparently had received the orders from God.

I now understand their position.

At that time, I already knew that God could use any money and many other resources He sent my way.

But I did not think a car fitted in that equation.

Looking back now, I know I blocked somebody needing a car to receive it. Actually, two people. And I denied the givers the joy of giving.

All because I held the view that those cars being given to me were to be personal property.

What am I saying?

Nothing given to the minister is personal property even when it is written in his name.

The earlier we learn that the earlier we can avoid Gehazi’s and Judas’s error.

The saddest part, however, is that everybody will give us as personal gifts and so we will legally be entitled to owning the gifts.

As I had written earlier, the giver will have designated the gift in the closet knowing that you will also be getting your directions for the administration of that gift in the same closet.

Sadly, very few ministers ever see the need of going to the closet to receive instructions on the administration of what they think is their personal gift.

And that is the reason we have so many ministers reaping Gehazi’s harvest in many ways.

I will not go into the specifics since I want this message to awaken our spirits to seek God’s minute direction in administering whatever He has entrusted to us, however personal we believe it is.

The primary reason being that the persons who gave prayed and were directed to give you that gift. Why then should you not pray to align that gift to the reason God ordered it to be brought your way?

Though this message appears normal, it really is a very heavy message. Because ignoring it directly opens you up for judgment, something I will not want a minister to undergo.

I also know that many ministers are walking in judgment for mishandling God’s gifts, and not because they used it them the pursuit of sin or wickedness.

They closed their eyes to the needs God wanted those gifts to meet.

Others are under judgment because they continue hoarding the gifts instead of releasing them where they are needed.

All this because we are insensitive to the still small voice of guidance on the gifts God has placed in our hands.

I pray that this will create or enhance the sensitivity of our hearts concerning the gifts we receive as ministers and the needs around us because the other extreme is irresponsible dishing out of gifts without seeking God’s guidance, that is also judged. 

Gehazi’s Harvest 2

Allow me to dwell more on trust placed upon ministers today.

And I do this because I am convinced that it is at that point that ministers most easily get into Gehazi’s harvest.

Have you ever cared to know why people give their offerings and any other gift they bring to church or you? Have you ever asked givers the focus or purpose of their giving?

As a minister who loves and ministers to the grassroots as is said, I am able to listen to the givers at a closer range that pastors.

I am presently dealing with an issue where some people have usurped the leadership the church had elected. Some of the things I continue to hear are very instructive for this topic.

Some people have stopped attending the church simply because they know that they must give an offering amongst other giving because they do not trust that leadership with the moneys given.

Instead of suffering a guilty conscience for the misuse of their gift, they opt to not attending the church.

The truth is that anybody in giving is responding to God’s prompt and so has an expectation of the direction of their giving. And it is guided by the giftings and callings God has placed on each one who has responded to His call.

Allow me to add another element to this.

Each calling has three clear and distinct assignments or teams though many times we only think of the visible one.

Take missions for example.

There is the root, the trunk and the branches that make the ministry we call missions.

The root is simply the foundational and most essential element, the one on which the others build on.

Call it the background ministry. The ministry probably nobody will see.

These are the people who agonise over the lost. The people who are heavily invested in missions in the closet.

They are the ones who secretly and generously give for missions.

Out of that group, and because of that group, come the logisticians and people who give pointedly to missions and administer resources to make missions most effective and impactful.

They are the ones who found and facilitate evangelistic organisations. They will also give designated funds for missions.

These I am calling the trunk.

Then we have the goers; the evangelists, the apostles.

Now look at the closet missionary whose heart beats missions.

Any coin he will give has missions written all over it. But he writes it in the closet.

He brings that money to the offertory basket confident that the closet has done its part as he had prayed.

Then the church board or pastor decides to use it to extend the sanctuary to be able to snatch members from neighbouring churches to be able to increase the offerings.

They will simply have stolen money meant for missions.

Do they know it?

Not directly, unless they have sought God’s counsel on the same. And they can’t risk that because God is about overturning our most cherished apple carts.

And they will pay for that.

It will be made worse by the fact that the giver will take his complaints to the closet where his gift originated from. He will not confront those thieves at any one time since his giving originated from the closet.

As a minister I receive many gifts.

But it is on very few chances that the giver told me to spend whatever they gave on myself and my interests. There are very few instances that the giver or supporter told me to use the money they had given me to pay house rent or school fees.

This means that most gifts are given for the single purpose of facilitating the ministry God has called me to.

That of course takes into consideration rents and food and children’s fees and personal needs for the single purpose of making my ministry succeed and have the right impact.

Focusing on me and my needs is therefore sowing into Gehazi’s garden.

Let me give an example I have given elsewhere.

One time a friend was giving away mattresses, almost a dozen of them and was giving me to take them to where there was need.

At that time, I needed one or two, but these were many.

I have a friend with a children’s home and so asked them whether they needed some mattresses and how many.

The astounding thing is that they needed the exact number I was administering.

That was the clearest indication that I was outside that equation.

I connected them and even more ministry partnership was occasioned by that.

Now suppose I had decided that my needs were more important than God’s direction?

Nobody could have questioned me since it was within my rights and power. Nobody could have known or cared even if they knew because I have ministered anyway.

But I then could have invited Gehazi’s harvest.

Nobody pays a pastor because he is a pastor. A pastor is facilitated to perform the pastoral ministry.

A prophet is not paid to or for prophecy. He is facilitated to function best in that ministry as we see with Elisha.

The Shunammite knew that when she was building a rest house for Elisha.

But Gehazi didn’t, as many of the ministers of our generation do not also.

I have mentioned missions. But the designation of the gifts is as varied as the gifts and callings God has on each and every one of His servants. I just used missions to give the structure against which we can judge any other ministry.

Probably the most dangerous ministry in this respect is the ministry of helps or what many churches call benevolence.

My interaction with the needy is that the most vocal requesters for assistance are very rarely the really needy, most being professional beggars, if I may call them thus.

You see, it is demeaning to confess helplessness and vulnerability. It is very shameful to confess that one is unable to provide for his family even to close friends and family. And that because very few people take kindly to giving assistance if there are no strings attached.

As someone who has gone through a need after another in ministry, there are times when hunger is preferable to assistance or support from some quarters. There is support one runs away from however bad the need is because it leaves a very bad taste on its reception.

The needy must first establish, not only the genuineness of the help being offered, but the love prompting it.

This therefore means that the giver must be very careful, not only to be seen to be concerned, but to be understood to be doing it from a heart of real concern. He must also be understood to be giving from a point of aiming at empowering instead of offering handouts. No sane person enjoys extending the begging bowl except the professional beggar.

The implications of this is that it is not easy to minister to the needy as it needs, not only very deep discernment, but also a heart that can draw the needy to our help, even feet that can visit to help them open their hearts to receive our help.

But aren’t they the ones who should be looking for help? I know someone is asking.

Who has been called to the ministry of helps? Whose responsibility is it to effectively minister that help? Who is answerable to God for that help?

Jesus did not wait for people to come for help. Many times, he reached out to people who did not even know who He was.

The Bible is full of God reaching out to people who did not even know they needed Him.

That for me describes the ministry of helps.

The reality on the ground is that the bulk of that ministry ends up in the hands of the wrong people, especially people who do not even need it.

Just like we see in the bursaries and scholarships, it is the one who can best package their perceived need who can access it, leaving the bulk of the needy out of something that exists in their name and for their use.

Do you think God is impressed when the resources given by the roots called into the helps ministry ends up in the hands of the professional beggar? Do you think God will ignore your ignorance in the way you administered it?

We need to pray to clearly know what God wants with us. We need to pray to know exactly how God wants to use us. And we need to really pray to accurately know how to manage the gifts God releases our way, and especially whether we should even accept them.

Or we will reap Gehazi’s harvest.

Gehazi’s Harvest

And he said unto him, Went not mine heart with thee, when the man turned again from his chariot to meet thee? Is it a time to receive money, and to receive garments, and oliveyards, and vineyards, and sheep, and oxen, and menservants, and maidservants? The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow. (2Kings 5: 26, 27)

I find Gehazi’s as among the saddest stories in the Bible

And why so?

Gehazi was the undisputed heir of Elisha’s prophetic ministry. He was the one due to receive the double portion of the same when the prophet exited the scene.

Not only that. But he had been very useful in Elisha’s ministry for long. To the point that he went out of the way to look for the background information that would make Elisha serve with the distinction we knew him of. Remember about the Shunamite woman who wanted nothing for her ministry to them?

He had been Elisha’s safe pair of hands.

Yet he blew it so badly.

All because he saw some freely floating money that he was unable to resist, money that Elisha had more or less dismissed with disdain.

He probably though Elisha did not appreciate how that money could have impacted their ministry. He probably thought that he could later use it to procure an ass for the prophet to ride those distances he used to trek. Probably he thought they could use the money to build better habitats for the schools of the prophets.

He probably thought that Elisha was too heavenly minded to be of any earthly good as many accuse some of us of being.

Or he was simply being greedy and thought that that money was the breakthrough he had been longing and waiting for until then.

That seed of greed was able to yield such a harvest as would completely alter his whole posterity.

He planted greed and harvested leprosy for whole generations.

Appears such a dire judgment for a small error until you look at it using God’s eyes; until you look at its impact on the ministry he was serving under.

Naaman was used to serving gods, demanding gods.

To him therefore, the God of Israel was just way bigger than the ones he had come across but not much different. His access was therefore not much different from that of the other gods. Remember Simon in Samaria?

Taking that gift was therefore blocking Elisha’s witness to this general. And no wonder the judgment was so dire.

Allow me now to write about us today. Allow me to apply Gehazi’s lesson to our times.

The other day I was shocked to come close to something many just hear about

A friend was nominated to a political office to represent persons with disability.

The night before the swearing in someone called and said that they had been replaced, and not by someone with any disability but by a relative of some party big brass.

Instead of feeling infuriated as is normal for me, I felt an intense sorrow for that person who chose Gehazi’s harvest.

You see, they probably never really needed that job since the brother in high places earned enough, not just to care for their needs, but to even get a better job elsewhere.

They did not need to fake disability. The kin could easily have procured another job. That is the saddest part for me.

That for me is a joke taken too far.

By their greed, or what they think is their need, they have opened a portal of unending disability for unending generations. They have opened a door for unending and unmeetable need beyond their feeble lifetimes.

Like Gehazi they have got much more than they had bargained for or anticipated.

But I am not stopping here.

Have you ever looked at yourself with God’s eyes to see how similar you may be to Gehazi as I like doing once in a while?

I am a minister and so will dwell on ministry and ministers to put God’s message across.

Have you ever been given something and told to give to someone in need because as a minister you are better placed to do so?

What did you do, especially when there is no requirement for accountability since the giver trusts you?

I know many ministers who decide that their need is the purpose of that gift and decide that there is nothing wrong with making that gift theirs.

I have been in churches that seasonally give towards the needy in their community. They give food, clothes and many other things a family in need may require.

Yet many times the leaders will pick the best and offer the remnants to the needy and none will be the wiser because the ones who gave have no business managing the distribution since there are ministers and church staff better equipped to do it.

I know of pastors who have been given a vehicle to help someone in their congregation who needs it and they own it or give to their best friend who may even have a better one.

Gehazi is not as far removed as we may think.

How many really needy people access the bursaries whose sole purpose is to make the needy able to access education? How many scholarships go to the truly deserving? How many jobs end up with the people who not only need them but are best qualified for them?

It is a small thing to think that the position you have is the ticket to whatever may pass through it.

Yet was that not Gehazi’s error?

Trust comes with responsibility, a responsibility to do the right thing without any supervision or accountability.

The truth is that it starts with God.

When God entrusts us with a responsibility, He has the expectation that we will do only what that trust entails without seeking personal reward.

Elisha refused that reward, not because he had no need, but because he was content with the little God had given him.

The fact that the Shunamite pitied him to build him a room to rest is telling. I believe she must have seen him weary for the journeys too many times to count.

You do not build a house for someone who passes by once a year, or even once a month.

That money could have done him much good. I am sure it could have bought him a horse, or at least a mule to ease his long journeys.

But he waited for God to release it when or ever He saw fit. And He does the same to us all the time.

When I was paying rent, God would sometime bring me money enough for rent and tell me not to pay my rent. And He would bring somebody He had prepared that rent for. Interestingly, He did that before releasing my rent.

But He would eventually release my rent.

But suppose I had taken Gehazi’s route as many of us are wont to take?

I could easily have released need into my composition. I could have harvested the need God had brought for me to overflow into. I could, like Gehazi, have become the curse the giver was running away from.

God is just and must reward our faithfulness as He punishes our rebellion.

I will write about other aspects later

This is just meant to make us reflect.