Between the Lines Theology 2

In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. (Isaiah 6:1)

I thought to give this message a very harsh title but realised there are some believers with very delicate sensibilities for serious stuff and changed.

But I have not changed the message.

Have you heard a message on Isaiah 6?

What was its focus?

I for one have heard it innumerable times in all sorts of settings.

Interestingly, the focus of all of them was on the death of the king and nothing else.

I for one have preached it a couple of times, but I focused on what the prophet saw since that is the purpose of that chapter.

Sadly, all the preaching I have heard about those first six words are purely speculative with no scriptural backing.

How stupid can a preacher get when he leaves the plainly written to concentrate on speculation?

Allow me to use another popular verse for preachers

And he said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak unto thee. (Ezekiel 2:1)

Again the whole focus of the messages is the order to stand on one’s feet leaving the rest of the chapter untouched. As if someone can stand on anything else!

Isn’t this akin to refusing to turn on the light to admire the chandelier?

Isn’t it akin to spending your day admiring a sign post instead of following the direction it is showing?

And why are there no messages on several other times Isaiah and other prophets gave the death of a king at the beginning of a revelation?

Do you realise that focusing on the wrong message is distractive and can end up being spiritually destructive?

Do you realise the devil is using those distractions to lead God’s people away from the momentous message following that corrupted focus?

Uzziah’s death was a reference point, a timeline of sorts just like we see Luke writing about happenings in heathen nations in his books.

It gave a historical context to his message, something all the other prophets did time and again.

Concentrating on the calendar instead of the message is like looking for a needle in a haystack when you are a cow.

Not only is it futile, it is absolutely pointless and useless since even finding that needle has no benefit to the cow.

The message of Isaiah 6 is the revelation of God and His glory.

The focus of Ezekiel 2 is the prophet’s ministry preparedness. And he also first sees God and His glory before getting to that point (chapter 1).

Everything else should serve to give greater clarity to the message and assignment at hand.

Incidentally, there are very many such messages focusing on speculation instead of the plainly revealed.

No wonder many in the church are experts on speculation on everything from current affairs to the end times.

I hope I have communicated

Dismantling Ananias’ Error

I have written elsewhere that I believe Ananias really didn’t have to die.

He died because the spiritual leadership did not have the capacity to handle his gift.

That is why they asked him to translate it into the money they could easily manage.

But money has a mind of its own. And it also has a voice.

It therefore started speaking to Ananias about the need to take just a little, probably to handle a small emergency elsewhere.

The result was that someone who had been able to wholeheartedly give a property was unable to give the proceeds of the same, simply because money operates on a completely different spiritual realm, a reality very few of us know or appreciate.

Anybody can comfortably give out of what they have without much struggle.

Someone who keeps cows will not have a problem giving a cow out of the ones he has. Yet he will have a major problem giving 10% of the money he receives from the same cow he was willing to give after selling it. He can comfortably give a litre of milk a day to a neighbour or friend but will find it extremely difficult to give a fraction after its sale in cash.

Someone with an orchard will have no issues giving a sack of fruits from it. But get him when he is coming from the market and he will struggle to give you a small portion of the sale of the same sack of fruits he would have freely given you.

I am sure that even a car dealer will not have a problem giving out a car but will struggle giving money. And it is the same with a land dealer, amongst other wealth producers.

The only people who have no problem giving out money are the corrupt and those who handle easy money; drug dealers, thieves, money launderers etc.

That because it costs them pretty little, if anything, to access that money. Like they say, easy come, easy go.

But someone completely surrendered to God will also have a healthy relationship with money; meaning that he will not have issues following God’s orders concerning the same. The voice of money will be stilled by God’s voice.

I have gone to those pricey hotels and restaurants for this or the other meeting.

Interestingly, if you are known to the management, they will have no qualms feeding you with food costing a few months’ rent.

As an aside, allow me to tickle you on this.

There was this time we were pursuing a ministry in one such hotel and the management was very receptive to the same.

As happens in such instances, the management would offer us a cup of tea and cake every time we would have our meetings that did not even include them.

My partner and friend decided to involve his denomination by inviting a reverend and a few other members.

After a few meetings, the reverend felt inspired and offered to buy the refreshment for our next meeting without caring to understand how we always enjoyed refreshment or the cost.

My friend, who was the connection to the management obliged and asked for the bill for the four of us.

The reverend started sweating after receiving the bill. He couldn’t imagine that tea could cost that much. And he had no capacity of meeting that bill.

My friend had to request that it be treated as at other times. Or he had probably foreseen the drama before it unfolded.

The point I am trying to make is that we are disenfranchising givers when we limit their giving to money.

They might not die like Ananias but they will lose the blessing that is the product of wholehearted giving.

But we would rather they lose that blessing because we are not willing or ready to handle the giving of God’s people. We would rather they lose that blessing because we feel it is beneath our status to dirty our hands managing that giving. We would rather they lose that blessing because we are not ready to be accountable for the way we will handle that giving.

You see, I can very easily move money from here to there without much effort and without anybody noticing. I will just need a receipt to justify any expenditure without any other verification, especially in a church setting. I can inflate prices of what needs to be procured.

But imagine trying to do that with cows and goats! Imagine doing that with milk and vegetables! Imagine doing it with the Nazirite! Imagine doing that with lands and houses!

And the same thing applies to the professional beggar.

I have been able to keep them off by agreeing with them.

I offer to take the one who is hungry to a restaurant and he flees. Taking someone to a stage and offering to pay fare to their destination and telling the conductor not to refund a coin does the same thing.

In short, proper giving is giving in kind.

Many people argue that we need money to eat and I always disagree.

We eat food and not money. And I pray for food, not money to buy food, and receive.

Like now I have just received a whole bunch of bananas!

We do not need money to travel. We need an available means. And I have over the years travelled distant places without a coin.

We limit God when we restrict His provision to money.

Anyway, we were talking about giving, though I think that aside is also useful.

We should therefore allow people to give what they deal with.

That way, we will very easily exclude defiled money from our coffers even as we will keep shady occupations and businesses from our membership.

You can’t imagine a harlot giving in kind. Nor would a drug dealer.

Even the corrupt will shun the altar because there would be nowhere to hide.

As things now stand, it is the corrupt and wicked who run churches because they have the financial muscle to push the godly out.

Let us look at probably the most misused verse in the Bible

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)

Have you noticed that great omission, storehouse and food?

There is a world of difference between a bank account and a storehouse as there is between food and cash. And that difference is what is making Ananias’ error thrive in our generation.

We should revert to what God meant when he talked about ministry and ministry support.

Just as you do not have to have money to minister, you do not need money to minister.

But you can’t do without food unless you are Moses. And even then, it was for the eighty days he was on the mount in God’s presence.

I believe even the most demanding of the constraints in a minister’s support can also be solved the same way.

What makes you think that a minister with an educational institution will not offer free tuition to some students as his ministry support? And what will make it so hard to offer a few of those chances to ministers’ children?

And it is the same with all other aspects of ministry.

I have had my rent reduced two times by two different landlords, and that in the city. And I had not even made any request. In one I even had rent arrears.

I do not dictate how God supports me. I do not look at money as the medium of support.

As a result of that reality, I am able to appreciate support in very many ways.

But due to that I am also not constrained in the way I minister.

I know the power of presence and so will visit even without a coin to be able to meet a need.

I offer technical assistance as my ministry, as a result saving people immense amounts of money, money they may not have.

I offer my expertise and experience in many fields as my ministry.

In short, I offer what God has given me in kind, the way God intended it.

It would be impossible to evaluate giving in kind because it is coming from the heart. It is giving responding to God’s prompting.

People wonder at Jesus’ saying that the two mites the widow gave was more that the whole giving of all the others.

She gave all she had while the rest gave money.

In short, she gave her livelihood while the rest gave a portion of what they had.

It is akin the Zarephath widow who prepared food for Elijah with the last flour and oil she had, the only food she had between her and her son and death.

And we still wonder why God overlooked all the widows (and families in Israel) when looking for somewhere for His prophet to hide!

Giving in kind requires a relationship with God. And it gives the greatest witness of our faith because it is the clearest demonstration of our detachment from things.

It is difficult, if not impossible, to know the amount of sacrifice and detachment from things when using money because it is impossible to know what remains after giving it.

Only God can tell the level of our sacrifice using money like we see with Jesus at the offering basket in the temple.

And humanly speaking, it is only normal to appreciate the thicker envelope than the sacrificial penny since it can take us farther. Remember Solomon stating that money is the answer to everything!

Giving in kind will many times accurately assess the commitment of the giver to the cause of Christ.

A peasant who gives a chicken from his three to support a church program will gain respect instead of spite than the millionaire who gives ten thousand.

I think an example is important at this point.

I rarely give any notice for pastoral visits, the simple reason being that giving it will place demands on the person being visited. This is even more important where the ministry is to the people Jesus’ anointing was focused on, the materially challenged or poor if you insist that I use that word though I have some portent definitions for the same.

Many will go to great lengths to entertain a minister. Some could even slaughter their only chicken. Others will get into debt. And pastors still argue that they are not privileged!

Well, I visited such a family and the mother was preparing a meal in their single room with the children eagerly surrounding her.

You could, from looking at the children, know that the children were hungry and probably had not eaten for some time.

It was also evident that the meal would be the only meal for the day.

After preparing the meal, she served me first, a sizeable serving, meaning that the children would barely have anything to eat.

Of course I couldn’t eat that food. But I couldn’t reject that honour.

I therefore took a bite and ‘became’ full immediately.

Would you compare that offering with a buffet in a five-star hotel?

It reminds me of David pouring the water his famous three had fetched by going through a Philistine garrison.

Or this other time a family with small children were leaving their small hut for me to spend the night to go and look for accommodation in similar small huts in the village.

The saving grace was in the fact that the place was very warm and so I said it would be impossible to sleep in a house in all that heat. I therefore comfortably spent the night in the open in the company of my host. But at least this time I had been invited.

That sacrifice is way higher than someone paying for a room for me in a five-star hotel.

But I couldn’t have appreciated it had there been lodgings and they had borrowed to pay for a room for me.

Incidentally, that is why for all my missions I prefer staying with a hosting family than staying in hotels and lodges. It makes it very easy to appreciate the giving as well as become a relevant guest/ minister.

But few ministers want to bend that low in their ministry.

Some even openly confess that doing that weakens their anointing. You wonder what kind of anointing since Christ’s anointing allowed Him to touch the completely untouchable, lepers, without being defiled.

Can we be more anointed than the Source of our anointing? Again, unless our source is not Christ?

What I am saying is that giving in kind is the giving God through His word advocates.

Changing our expectation to other giving therefore emasculates true giving by introducing other dynamics and temptations to it.

It is difficult to divert giving in kind.

You see, If I am taking a thousand to church and meet a need requiring a hundred, it is very easy to be moved by the plea and reduce the gift. But I can’t do that when I am driving a cow, or sack of produce, or car. And even if I will do so, it will be doing the ministry the gift would have done anyway.

Temptations like Ananias’ will vanish when we agree with the scriptures and encourage giving in kind.

I know this is a monumental challenge.

But think about it. Then pray about it.

But what about those who earn money? What about those medium of trade/occupation is money?

That is their kind.

It would be as disastrous for them to buy cows to give as offerings. Yet we do not think so when people sell cows and lands to take money as offering.

Mega Church Lapses

I want us to look at you today, you who was raised in those deplorable and backward places where nothing worked, but who later, due to education, position, or profit relocated to the big city.

I especially want to speak to you who was raised in that humdrum church in those places who has finally found your ‘rest’ in a mega church and completely forgotten where he came from because it even appears shameful to be associated with such small beginnings.

I do not know whether you realise that that offering you give in that city mega church can comfortably and sufficiently support a pastor of that small church you now despise. That the small offering the big church does not really appreciate can make a huge difference in that church that made you who you are spiritually. That the church that raised you has stagnated because you have decided to effectively forget her existence, at least in your giving.

I do not know whether you realise that probably the reason the church is still backward is because you renounced it when you ‘made it’ in life.

I do not know whether you know that nothing is working in that village church because you have concentrated all your effort, experience and resources on a church that needs you for the money and expertise you give than the person you are.

And to be as crude as many are, do you realise that when you die it is that neglected village church that will carry the bulk of the burden of burying you?

Why am I writing this?

Tithe peddlers always remind the ones they are fleecing to take their money where they are fed, meaning where they are entertained or pampered.

But why do they not speak about remembering where they were breastfed?

That is the purpose of this message.

You are who you are because someone nurtured you from birth.

And it is not much different in the spiritual.

That Sunday school that taught you songs you did not understand has had a much greater influence on your spirituality than that comedic pastor who commands you to possess and claim.

The clearest you will find this is in one’s understanding of sin and the holy place.

That is why some are blatant sinners while others are very ashamed if they are caught. That is why you see some who do not have issues stealing or misusing church resources even as others would rather that their resources are swallowed up instead of touching church things.

The building blocks of your spiritual foundations are the reason you are the way you are.

That is the foundation I want us to remember.

Allow me to demonstrate the truth that the megachurch is only interested in what it can get from you, very simply.

How does it deal with sin?

Do you realise that most of these stinky and corrupt politicians that are morally decadent even if we used secular standards are members of these megachurches? The simple reason is those fat envelopes they give.

But I suspect you fled the village church because you know they will not be scared of your money and be scared of rebuking your sin. They would rather ‘starve’ than compromise their revelation.

But not many fled the village church because of sin.

Many did it because they got scared of giving, thinking that the village church is composed of beggars.

They therefore fled to the city where they are being milked dry by the educated smooth talkers.

They are giving much more in churches that use their money badly because they are scared of giving it to a church where they can trace the last coin.

They are giving their money to take their smooth-talking fraudsters for cruises and holidays when the same money could have sorted the roofing of their village church.

They are giving so that those comedic ‘pastors’ can buy houses and fuel guzzlers that they will still have to give to maintain when the same money could have installed electricity in that village church.

They are giving their money for mission trips that are mostly holidays when the same money could have bought instruments for that village church.

Do I hate the megachurch?

Of course not.

But I have been in megachurches, even been in leadership and know that for the most part the megachurch is a monster of a structure where spiritual accountability is very difficult to be found.

Ministers who are walking in their calling are too busy doing what they have been called to to think of taking leadership. Meaning that leadership is mostly taken by the wheeler-dealers, spiritual fraudsters, brokers or immature believers.

This means that chances of your giving going to where you intended it rarely, if ever, happens.

Incidentally, even if you get into leadership, you will discover that there are some who have more mouth than others. This means that your input will only be useful if it is in line with them. Otherwise, you may as well go hang.

But the village church is small, just as the village. This means that everybody’s opinion matters, even the ones of those not in leadership.

The other megachurch dynamic you will notice is ministry.

If you are not known, especially if your money is not visible, you may as well forget ministry from the church.

Many people who are not well off who go to a megachurch do so for the purposes of rubbing shoulders with the movers and shakers of society and not ministry. They think that standing side by side with a millionaire in church will somehow transfer the millionaire anointing to them.

It is when a crisis occurs that you realise the superficial nature of the megachurch fellowship. And I have seen enough of those heartbreaks.

But the village church does not operate that way, simply because everybody knows everybody else. And they will do all things together.

Though sin can thrive in a megachurch, it will find it very difficult to do so in a village church unless the same village has wicked foundations that the church is scared to confront. Or the said church was built on a corrupt foundation.

You see, normal is the operating spiritual system a child found.

A child who found obscenity thinks it is the norm and is even surprised to go to a place that lacks it.

The same goes for a child who found deference for the holy place and things, amongst other realities.

There is this person who views not going to church on Sunday the unpardonable sin because that is how he was brought up even as another thinks going to church is enough to bribe God.

I do not know whether we are getting anywhere.

What I am saying is that the village church has contributed more to your spiritual development than that surge of adrenaline you are being fed by that superstar you are calling pastor, bishop, prophet, apostle or any other title.

This means that as part of our appreciation for where God has taken us, we should honour those spiritual foundations with our resources.

Most, probably all megachurches do not know you apart from what they can get from you, from money to the deference your position attracts.

But the village church will treat you as you are without any deference to what you have since it raised you without them anyway. Or you do not remember Jesus in Nazareth?

Yet Jesus did not desert Nazareth, even dying with the name on His epitaph.

That is what I believe we should do with our Nazareth, wherever it is.

Allow me to add another aspect as a footnote to this.

Do you know those ministers who remain hidden most of the time yet are the ones you will always run to when you have a crisis?

Those are the other people you are sinning against God by neglecting in your giving and other support.

You should ask yourself why you will not run to your superstar pastor when you have a crisis yet will always run to him with an envelope when you are celebrating something. You should ask yourself why he never comes to your mind when you get that promotion, job or travel documents to your Canaan. Yet he is the only shoulder you will cry on when your life is a mess. Yet he is the only one you run to when you need counsel. Yet he is the only one you will run to when you need prayers because you know that he will pray.

Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward. (1Timothy 5: 17, 18)

Second to your village church is therefore the minister who does not remind you to support him or remind you of the many ways he has ministered to you.

Forgetting him is ingratitude of the highest order.

I will also mention the husband.

Many wives will treat their husbands as trash when it comes to spiritual things.

Yet it is this same husband who allows you to not only attend those meetings belittling him, but also funds you to do it, at the very least by reducing his expectation of what you should have done had you not attended those ‘enriching’ sessions.

Wives will leave their homes for days without as much as informing their husbands where they are going yet call him a demon when he takes responsibility for his house by demanding an explanation. Yet the same wives will call him weak if he doesn’t demand it.

Allow me to leave this here as I do not intend to build on it, at least in this post.

It is an addendum to what I am sharing.

I know I have made enough enemies by writing this post. But I would rather be right with God than be relevant to worldly expectations.

In any way, would you please show me where I have gone against scripture?

Watch or Listen?

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: (John 10:27)

The context of this message is a quote from a very good Bible study book called Experiencing God.

It says something like this

See what God is doing and join Him.

I am sure these are not the actual words but that is the thrust of the statement.

At face value, it looks like a very healthy quote.

Allow me, however, to look at some of its implications.

The first is the subtle assumption that God does not speak.

That is why we must wait to first see His wind moving to know what and where He is at.

That single error has the capacity of leading us to places God never intended for us to get to.

Before I get to Biblical examples, allow me to remind us of things that are happening all around us.

Doomsday cults operate on that principle.

The people who were recently starved to death, hundreds of them, were following God’s move.

Even cults thrive on that principle.

That is why they manufacture miracles and prophecies to prove that they have or are in the move of God.

Most televangelists and prophets thrive on that.

Though I do not follow them, I am also certain that most social media ministers operate on the same principle.

In the Bible, we see many incidences of the same.

The mixed multitude that was a thorn in Moses’ flesh simply followed that move.

Lot followed Abraham because it was evident that God was with him.

Michal loved David on the same terms.

And I am sure Gehazi served Elisha for the same reason.

On the home front, I am sure many Christian marriages fail because they were built on that dynamic.

You see, joining someone who is working does not automatically unite you with them.

You are an admirer of what you have seen. You are simply like a social media follower.

Compare that with Jonathan.

He saw David and the spirit he operated under and sought partnership, even surrendering his position to the anointing he had seen, unlike his sister.

Also, unlike Gehazi, we see Elisha surrendering everything to simply pour water on Elijah’s hands, eventually requesting to inherit him and succeeding.

Seeing God at work is therefore not enough to get us into a relationship with Him.

Because God does speak. In fact, He has already spoken.

But beyond that, He seeks to speak to anyone willing to hear.

And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. (Mark 4:9)

Looking for the evidence of His working is an inferior method of partnering with God because He is already looking for partners who will receive His orders.

The second problem with the statement is that we must become observers before joining God.

This means that we are reactors, followers instead of workers, partners. And that is a big difference.

This is because someone else must first hear from God and start moving before I even consider moving. Someone must first initiate obedience before I can join the move of God.

Imagine if all of us did that!

What would have happened had Samuel followed that advice? What about David when Goliath was harassing the Israeli army? Incidentally that is what the army was waiting for the forty days Goliath was harassing them.

And the men of Israel said, Have ye seen this man that is come up? surely to defy Israel is he come up: and it shall be, that the man who killeth him, the king will enrich him with great riches, and will give him his daughter, and make his father's house free in Israel. (1Samuel 17:25)

The reason they couldn’t fight or surrender was because they were waiting for a man to initiate the move of God that they could then join him.

We can’t hide under waiting to see the move of God to respond because God seeks people to initiate those moves. Incidentally that starts with you.

For who hath despised the day of small things? for they shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel with those seven; they are the eyes of the LORD, which run to and fro through the whole earth. (Zechariah 4:10)

Someone MUST start. And that person is someone who has received the order

Waiting for him to move before joining means that you are an outsider to the things of God.

It is the non-believers who are drawn to the faith by those moves; simply because they do not know God and so need some demo of sorts to believe.

Remember that Jesus, though He performed miracles at will, refused to give a sign to the Jews.

And why?

Because they knew God beyond signs since they had His word.

By waiting to see the move of God, we are simply repeating the same error.

Believers do not chase signs and wonders. Believers do not chase prophets and prophecies. Believers do not chase miracles or glitter of any kind and type.

That is the preserve of the cynics.

We have God’s word that we should hide in our hearts and minds. We have His Spirit to guide us to His will. We have His power resident in us.

In fact, those miracles are resident in us by virtue of the Holy Spirit being released to us.

Seeking drama of any sort is therefore an indictment on our rebellion.

Pretending to use it to guide our obedience is akin to worshiping another god, the god of displays.

The third reason that statement could mislead is because waiting to see God and joining that move will make me a secondary recipient of His guidance.

As is commonly said, God does not have any grandchildren.

Why then should He use a proxy to get me into His work? By proxy I mean somebody else who is working causing me to work.

God is interested with a relationship with His people. And that relationship is a very personal one.

This means that He seeks to speak to us as personally as possible so that we are very clear with what He wants with us.

He is not interested in our guess work. He is not interested in our interpretations of what He wants us to be and do.

What some of us are doing is akin to a son asking his father, who is at home with him, to send him a letter through the post office (or email) so that he can understand what he wants.

We are the move of God if we are obedient to His revelation.

And that is the move He will use to draw the world to Himself.

Let us immerse ourselves in His word to know Him.

Let us obey everything He commands to align ourselves with His will.

That is what will create the momentum for the move the world will see to come to Him.

New World Church 3

I promised to deal with some reasons Biblical elders refuse to take their positions and insist on remaining active in ministry, even despite their waning strength.

The first is the dynamic of modern living.

In the past, children would automatically continue in the occupations of their parents and would learn the skills through apprenticeship. We did not have formal schools or jobs.

Today, all children go to school in a system designed to keep them unproductive until they complete. Then they continue being dependent until they get a job.

This means that they will be dependent on their parents for a very long time, at least till their mid twenties.

Another dynamic of modern living is that the marriage age has gone much higher than in the past.

This means that most will get married into their thirties.

A dynamic that seems to counter that is that most couples insist on having very few children.

But even then, it raises serious issues.

A pastor who gets married at thirty-five and gets a child immediately will get him at thirty-six.

At fifty, when he is supposed to retire from active ministry and take the Biblical role of elder, his first born is only fourteen, either in or joining high school.

Incidentally, that is when education starts becoming expensive. And he could be having another child or two.

The pull between what God’s word says and the dynamics of his life make it very difficult for him to even listen to God or even consider His way of doing things.

Even if he decides to push God’s retirement age to sixty, he still would be having greater needs because then his children will be in college, an even more expensive obligation.

That is why it becomes very easy to trash God’s word.

But closing our eyes to what God’s word commands does not invalidate it.

The need to remain afloat in the sea of parental demands has no way of annulling or even weakening God’s revelation.

We had better align ourselves with what God says to be able to walk with His favour and provision.

I am not an elder because I have all my chips aligned.

If anything, I am in a more difficult position than most. And I have been like that for most of my ministry years.

But I choose obedience because it allows God to always show off in my situation.

As an example, many believers will only remember to support ministers when they see them at work; either through reports or appeals.

But God not so long ago asked me to stop even sending those ministry updates. Meaning that those supporters who require the plodding of updates and reports will simply disappear.

Incidentally, they are the ones who request for those updates and reminders and so it is not begging as many might be thinking.

What this means is that my support is purely in God’s hands even as the educational demands are growing. It means I have completely lost control of my support since anybody who will give me will have to be prompted by God to do so.

My support has dimmed dramatically even as I am writing this, meaning I am writing this probably more for me than for you.

There are other orders I have received that has made the expectation of support for ministry even more ominous.

However, this has made me more focused on pursuing obedience because I know God is only involved in what is pursued in obedience.

There have of course been miracles of provision, some very dramatic. But they have not been in tandem with how they were when I was visible.

But we must take our roles seriously if the church will support us.

We must minister in that role before believers see the necessity of that role enough to pour their resources into it. We must minister in that role properly for the church to realise the need to support us.

Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward. (1Timothy 5: 17, 18)

You may realise that these elders are ruling, in other words exercising authority or bringing order in the church.

But they are not using whips and swords since their rulership is spiritual.

And their authority is not questioned because they have lived a full life of integrity and service.

Those verses are also talking about taking care of these elders since they have left fishing to watch over the church of Christ with their oversight.

I can confidently say that God is taking care of me, and has been since I decided to take my role of Biblical elder as the Bible states.

As happened when Israel was crossing the Jordan, we must put our feet completely into the flooding river before God can part it. We must trust God to release our cares completely into His revelation before He can take responsibility for our needs.

What I mean is that we must be operating in the elder position before we can expect God to make any sense of our nonsense of complete obedience.

We must throw away our crutches before we can walk in our healing, however secure we felt in those crutches.

That salary, that support, that honorarium; in fact, everything you were harvesting from the visibility of your ministry must be intentionally forsaken. Simply because elders are not visible.

As an aside, only elders can conclusively deal with a sin issue in the church leadership.

Any member of that leadership, even the pastor, will find it impossible to deal with corruption and many other destructive sins in the leadership because he is part of it. And the collective nature of decision making makes it almost impossible. The fact that it is the same body that decides his package makes it impossible to even attempt to put his foot down on issues dear to his heart.

Putting his foot down will simply divide the leadership and even the church due to the influence those leaders have, especially because there are relationships and interests being represented by each leader. Church splits are many times the product of such an attempt.

I for one have over the years in many committees attempted to deal with issues and was met with defamation, at times being ejected from leadership when they realise they can’t argue their way out of their sin or explain away their indiscretions since vested interest can also be found in church.

But an elder is not part of the leadership and so can be trusted to offer a sober solution to issues. He has also been in leadership and therefore knows the dynamics of that leadership. The fact that he served with distinction makes it easy for any leadership to take his word and counsel he offers seriously.

My argument so far is that an elder MUST NOT be in leadership. But he must have had actively served the Lord with integrity and distinction before he became an elder.

You can’t have a pastor who chased girls being entrusted with eldership because he will then be chasing people’s wives. You can’t have a person who had a reputation of Judas being an elder because he will always favor the side that had the best gifts. And we can’t have a person whose children are sons of Belial being an elder because it will be difficult to blot that stain from their character.

The Bible is very clear on the qualities of an elder.

If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate; Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. (Titus 1: 6 - 9)

A bishop is simply an overseer, an elder.

Nobody will trash the word of such an elder. Nobody will get enraged by the rebuke from such an elder. Nobody will run away from the counsel of such an elder.

That is what the modern church lacks.

And it lacks because the ones who should take that role are preoccupied with family affairs and the growth of their megachurches instead of looking at the big picture, God’s picture. They are preoccupied with chasing the shadows of ministry relevance that they forget that the only relevance that counts is the relevance God approves.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7: 21 - 23)

It is not the doing of God things that takes us to heaven. It is only doing what God has for us to do.

Are we together?

New World Church 2

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7: 21 – 23)

It is imperative that I give a context for my last message for the purposes of some to be able to appreciate why elders are essential for the health of the church.

And I will start by asking some obvious questions.

Can pastors fall in sin?

Can pastors backslide?

Can bishops forsake the faith?

Do Christian leaders encounter temptation like other believers and can they also fall?

Why all these questions?

Many ‘average’ believers think that their leaders are infallible. Many think that the presence of a position in the spiritual is total insurance against anything the devil can attempt.

Sadly, they also live as such.

Why then did Jesus close His sermon with this warning?

How could He say He does not know people who had been effective in ministry?

It simply means that it is possible to start right in the things of God and end up irrevocably lost.

And the Bible flows with example after another of the same.

From Balaam to Saul to Hezekiah to Asa to Uzziah.

And in the New Testament, from Judas to Ananias to Demas to Diotrephes.

Ministers are fallible too.

1 Corinthians 10:12 is also addressed to us ministers, and probably more.

Treating a fallible being as infallible is literally killing them spiritually because they have no capacity of handling themselves at that level.

Remember an incident in the recent past when there was an uproar after a bishop impregnated his parishioner?

Then what happened?

Other bishops scrambled a defence that was laughable. They repented on behalf of their colleague.

You would wonder whether he had been representing them in that bed of sin. Or probably he had.

Word on the street was that that sheep just became wayward and did the unthinkable.

During those trysts, girls are supposed to take interventional contraception. And in case conception still happens, there is enough offering money to fund abortions.

Sadly, that is quite widespread in church circles.

A friend who had been a gateman/ watchman of a flat in a posh estate told me of his disgust when he would see a revered and ancient archbishop bring girls, different girls, some his granddughter’s age, to an apartment he had rented there for sex purposes. And you can be sure that those sin excursions were funded by tithes and offerings.

If you are able to hear people who work on those expensive hotels and exclusive getaways, you will be nauseated by the things you hear about the conduct of some of those senior clerics you admire; from drunken fights to obscene language to sex orgies.

And the list goes on and on.

But as always, I will hasten to add that not all are like that.

There are a few who have not stained their garments and have kept to the straight and narrow conscientiously. These are the ones who make this post urgent because they will be lumped together with these rotten caricatures of ministers. Because very few, especially the unbelievers who desperately need our witness, can tell between a sheep and a wolf garbed like a sheep, which is what these conmen are.

Accountability is not there to question someone’s commitment to the cause of Christ. It is not there to hinder the performance of someone’s ministry. It is not there to doubt the anointing.

Accountability presupposes the limitation and fallibility of man, however anointed he is.

In fact, accountability starts at the point that the anointing is evident. It starts at the point that the ministry is portent.

And that because it is very difficult to fall into pride when we are struggling to establish anything. It is impossible to fall into sin when we are building foundations.

Saul did not start disregarding God’s word when he was ‘fighting’ for acceptance but when his army was fully behind him.

You might also remember that David fell into sin after he had more or less vanquished his enemies and sent his army for conquests for the fun of it, and that in distant lands.

All these characters we see in the Bible who fell from grace did it more or less at their pinnacle.

We must therefore start the accountability early to forestall that. And only elders have the Biblical mandate to handle that.

I am sure that most of those excesses are driven by the pressure to continue functioning beyond the Biblical mandated time, especially because they refused to mentor others to take over their positions when the time came. They felt threatened instead of relieved when their vigour waned.

Like Saul, they then started fighting the move of God using those ecclesiastical offices.

Those other sins and abominations are just fights to maintain relevance.

Yet had they just listened to the One who called them they could have simply taken the elder role.

This could have released them to serve an even bigger and wider constituency.

As an example, I receive calls from ministers I have never met or even heard of who were referred to me for ministry. And I am sure it is because I am available, and untethered to structures. They can trust me to keep their secrets because nobody can coerce me to divulge them since I am not in anybody’s employ.

They also know that they will have my undivided attention.

To the ant ministers, an elder appears like an idler because he is always found at the city gates.

But you may remember that it was at those city gates that Mordecai was able to thwart an assassination. And apparently nobody else in that gate even knew how he was able to do it because they didn’t even know that he was the one who intervened.

An African proverb summarises the role of the elder.

A seated elder can see farther than a young man on an elevated platform.

I will later look at the reason/s ministers are scared of becoming elders when their time comes.

For example, why do senior ministers refuse to take sabbatical leave? Why do they always refuse to retire when the time comes? And why do they change church constitutions to extend their stay in those offices when they are most qualified to serve as elders?

New World Church

I have for a very long time struggled through understanding the leadership confusion in the church today.

Why is there so much corruption in church and faith-based structures?

Why is there so much unchallenged sin?

I am writing this as someone who has over the years attempted to challenge sin and wickedness in churches and Christian groups I have been part of, especially the ones that were foolish enough to put me in leadership.

And I am saying foolish because they interpret my passion and commitment to ministry wrongly; thinking that only zeal separates my practice of religion with theirs.

But it rarely takes long before what they always assumed as acceptable is challenged by scripture and godly logic.

I of course try as much as possible to follow the same scriptures in the challenge.

Allow me to give an example.

I was at one time an elected leader of a Christian Union and in a short while the bigger chaps in the CU became uncomfortable with my presence though they could not do much about it.

One of my quarrels with them was passing things and setting ambitious plans that never worked, some of which did not make much sense.

Why are we discussing another engagement when we have three previous ones that we had already decided on yet have done or are doing nothing about them? Was my main argument.

Why are we discussing plans for new things instead of discussing the implementation of the already agreed on plans?

But things came to a head when they invited a heretic for an overnight meeting. And I didn’t know him and so went to hear a good preacher. Incidentally he was very entertaining, even though he could become gross.

I took notes very studiously.

When the dust settled, I went back to the notes and started seeing very clear signs of open heresy, statement so clearly unscriptural.

I was unable to let that pass as I prayed.

But I had to also use scripture to challenge that heresy.

I looked for him (that was before the internet) until I got his postal address (these were the 80s).

I then wrote him a letter outlining all the points at which he had strayed from the scriptures and showed him the scriptural position. I also gave him my address, even to the room I stayed in so that we could examine the scriptures together since I did not think anybody chooses error wittingly.

Interestingly, instead of responding to my letter or even seeking my audience, he told the leaders who had invited him that I had called him a heretic, something I did not do.

All the other officials (or probably the big mouthed ones) had some private meetings to discuss what they needed to do with me.

Then a meeting was called that I attended without knowing that I was the only agenda.

After the chairman talking volumes, he got to the point.

Someone called the preacher a heretic.

That didn’t affect me since I didn’t, and second, my letter was personal, even seeking an audience.

They got stuck.

Then I think somebody else said that he had said that someone had told him that some things he had taught were unscriptural.

I said I had told him that.

So, you wrote the letter?

Of course, from there pandemonium though it is impossible to mob the truth.

They then kicked me out of their committee and I walked out knowing that it was because I sought to right a wrong scripturally.

But what they did after that was more saddening.

When the time for the elections of new officials came, due to their fear of me being elected into office again, probably even being made chairman, they effectively rigged the whole thing by choosing their people and asking the membership to place them into positions.

Yet I have never sought any positions since I responded to God’s call. In fact, I try my best to avoid them since they are many times a drag on my assignment. And I was very young then.

Why do such things happen in the church Christ purchased with His blood? And I say this because I have witnessed similar things more times than I care to remember.

The first reason is that we have corrupted the New Testament model.

The New Testament church did not have an ultimate leader or board. It had accountable relationships of ministers.

Though Peter was the pope (according to some), he never was absolute in any way.

Remember when God sent him to Cornelius?

He had to give an account of his departure from what the other elders thought was their mission.

You may also remember Paul openly rebuking him yet in his letter he writes of him very highly instead of calling him insubordinate.

Or in Acts 15 when the church has to deal with the inclusion of the gentiles.

The church was led by very spiritual elders who were placed in those positions by their relationship with God and how it ministered to the flock.

I do not see any evidence of elections being done to choose those elders. Their spirituality did not need any human push to authenticate.

As an example, how did James (Jesus’ half brother) become a pillar yet we see him with the rest of his brothers doubting Jesus when the apostles were completely sold out to Him? How did he overtake them?

You can be sure that it was not just because he was related to Jesus as we see even Jude, instead of mentioning about his earthly connection with Jesus was content to say he was related to James.

God had raised him to the point that his leadership did not need any trumpeting. Just like Jesus did not tell His disciples that Peter was the leader they should have submitted to. Nor did Peter at any time ask to be recognised as a leader. Again no elections were ever held.

Their relationships and fellowship were able to shine out the leadership inherent in each of the disciples without bringing down anybody else.

All were leaders but Peter and James stood above the rest in the fellowship.

I am sure that like Paul they did not feel qualified to be leaders because of their past (James doubted and even challenged Jesus’ authenticity and Peter denied Him). You may even remember that Jesus sought out the same Peter after His resurrection.

That is why he was subject to the other elders since he knew that he was not any better than they were. And that is why he took Paul’s very ‘humiliating’ rebuke very positively.

That is the most glaring difference I see with the modern church.

Challenging a pastor’s sermon is many times treated as heresy. Questioning a minister’s conduct is treated as blasphemy. And demanding scriptural explanation for some crazy things churches do is treated as touching the anointed.

There simply is no accountability in church leadership.

Of course, there is a pretence of the same because churches have elders and deacons.

But what sort of accountability can we have when the same elders and deacons are chosen by the pastor?

We say that the church has its foundations on apostles and prophets.

What kind of foundation are we having when the pastor is the apostle and prophet rolled on in one?

We have bishops and overseers (although that is actually the same thing)

Can I oversee others when I am in the thick of things with my own kiosk?

How can I be a supervisor of someone’s enterprise when I am running a similar enterprise on the side?

How can I be a foreman of someone’s building when I am doing the same on my site?

What I am trying to make us understand is that we are severely limited in what we can do at any one time, not only because I cannot be at two places at one time but also because my mind is unable to focus on several different things at one time.

You can’t be overseeing several churches when you are also pastoring your own church.

How will you prioritise between the crisis in your flock and the one in the diocese?

Who will you rush to rescue between a marriage in your church falling apart and a pastor who has been kicked out? What between your choir or prayer team falling apart and a church whose leadership is falling apart will you rush to rescue? And what between attending a fundraiser in one of the churches you lead and dealing with the reduction of the contributions churches make that has drastically reduced your ‘salary’?

We have in our folly of seeking to be in control lost the essence of Christ’s ministry.

Holding a title has become more important than functioning in it.

Feeding off a title has become of greater worth than feeding others using it.

Personal emolument is a greater driver than self sacrifice.

No wonder accountability structures are hated and dreaded when they cannot be avoided.

That is why church constitutions are more frequently changed than the political ones; because the man or men at the top does not want his foibles to be legally challenged.

That is why retirement ages are always being pushed higher and higher because the big fish would rather die in office than raise a Timothy or a Titus or a Mark.

And they fear retirement because they know they have absolutely no spiritual investment on the ground since they poured it all into their stomach or their cronies.

The only spiritual war they fight is against their growing irrelevance in the spiritual. And that since the devil doesn’t really mind their high-sounding proclamations and declarations since they are doing absolutely nothing to threaten his kingdom.

I have thrown this stone to rouse some reflection on our values and structures.

Why do Peter and John call themselves elders and not apostles in their epistles?

Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church. (3John 1:10)

As an aside, could John have been able to plan such trips if he was running his own congregation? And how many such trips could he have been able to plan on a regular basis?

And how could Peter have been able to be out of Jerusalem for so long during the Dorcas and Cornelius ministries if he had had a congregation he was pastoring?

I believe the essence of oversight demands freedom from attachment.

In fact, even the elder demands someone with grown children according to the Bible. Because only then can someone be able to spend more time on church affairs without sacrificing his family.

That is why we see Samuel failing on the family front even as he excelled ministry wise.

I am writing this sitting on the elder seat as I am learning the ropes of my responsibilities.

Allow me to give you a small glimpse of a typical day in my very relaxed schedule. And I will write about the ‘abnormal’ things occupying it.

I wake up before six to switch on the Audio Bible I broadcast to my neighbours.

When I switch it off at eight, I will many times sit down on the computer to write these messages as God releases them. And I do it in the morning for two main reasons.

My mind and spirit are at their freshest in the morning and my solar system is not big enough to work on later if I must have adequate power at night.

After that I will more or less relax and wait for ministry, many times in terms of calls

And I receive calls!

Calls requiring counsel. Calls asking for ministry direction. Calls requiring encouragement.

There are times I can spend up to four hours on a single call.

Other times God would ask me to also buy adequate minutes and reach out to people needing ministry, some we have not had contact for years.

The bulk of those calls are from ministers (the majority beingserving pastors) and dealing with ministry issues. God using my ministry experience to guide others into the ropes of ministry as they are growing, though some of them may have been in ministry for as long or even longer than I have been; the difference being that the model God has released for me to use is much more radical than theirs.

During that time, I would also be on my small piece of land looking at the progress of my fruit trees and dealing with any eventualities (I never thought trees would demand so much attention); pests, lack of water, stray growth, etc.

Mid afternoon would find me heading to the shops, choosing the ones that are far and using the routes with less traffic for the purposes of getting adequate time to meditate but also open myself up for ministry. And there are times that twenty-minute journey could take over two hours for the ministry God would bring.

Would that be possible in my previously fast-moving ministry seasons?

How possible would it be for me to detach from my very pressing ministry engagements to create that much time consistently to guide someone in a position similar to mine? How easy would it be for me to kick out a counselee to focus on a struggling pastor?

There are times when I have to travel of course.

I would receive calls and be saddened because there is no way I could do the ministry I always easily do because I am in a public vehicle or in a meeting or in someone’s shop.

God dramatically scaled down my writing ministry for the same reason. And I had to stop much of the publishing, even for missions’ materials because God needs that ‘idle’ time to use me properly as an elder. I had to source for other ministers to continue doing it.

What I am saying is that an elder needs to be freely available to be of much use since crises do not give any advance notice.

He needs to be occupied in affairs that would be able to easily release him to respond to whatever crisis God would release his way without having to leave other crises in the wake.

That is how the African nations operated.

Incidentally, that also appears to be the way Israel operated.

How many times do you read of elders being found on the city gates? What would their purpose be if not to respond to societal situations as they arose.

You are therefore not a Biblical elder if you are occupying an ecclesiastical office even if you are a hundred years old. And by continuing to force that position you are denying yourself much usefulness and fulfilment to get the pittance you continue receiving as a bishop, senior pastor, apostle, general overseer, archbishop and any other title you may think befits your position.

You are denying the church of Christ your walk of faith by living so selfishly. And it is sad because you are becoming what Christ called some, hireling.

Detach yourself from that pay package to be of any use to the church of Christ.

And I know I am offending some immensely. But if I do not say this, who will?

Pray through this ‘offense’ and allow God to speak to your situation specifically since this post speaks in a general way.