Giving and Money

If you will allow me I want to state that you probably should do some press ups before reading this post because I am saying some things off the normal.

Do you realize that money was the reason Ananias and his wife died? That had money been removed from the equation their story could have turned out otherwise?

You see, they had given their parcel of land for God’s use without reservations.

It is possible that the apostles advised them to sell the land as the church then did not have need for the land or the logistics of disposing the same. You realize deacons were chosen later.

The dynamic of greed and deception came in when they held the wads (or whatever their money was held by) of cash after selling the land.

Then the same people who had willingly and freely given their piece of land started seeing opportunities, new opportunities that never existed when they were giving the land.

Of course the devil saw an opportunity to bring in deception that resulted in death.

Who then was at fault here? Could we really wholly blame the couple?

I think the church leadership should take a lot more blame for the death of the couple than the couple did. I am not saying they were guiltless. And I will give a verse to explain what I mean.

And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much. (Acts 5:8)

It means that they had had an earlier agreement that the couple would sell the land. Were it not for the revelation of the Holy Spirit Peter would not have known that greed had overtaken them.

What am I saying?

I am saying that were it not for the fact that the couple was asked to sell their land and bring the money to the apostles, there was no way greed could have overtaken their generosity. Money was the catalyst to that greed.

In short, giving and money are not very compatible.

As a farmer will tell you, it is easier to give someone a chicken or goat than the money you get from the sale of the same. It is much easier to give someone a plate of food than give them money for them to buy the same.

Money is sticky to its holder. Things rarely are except to the stingy.

Attaching monetary value to things is therefore is an easier way to make people stingy than asking and expecting the things as they are.

People who would normally not spare a thought for you as far as money is concerned do not have any problem giving you a very expensive piece of furniture when they buy another one. People who think giving a dollar as support to a minister may not have an issue giving everything in their garage when asked for the same. And people who may call a minister a leech when asked for money may very freely give out their very expensive washing machine and cooker after buying new ones.

I believe money is a tool from the enemy just like many other weapons. And it is a tool he has used with the greatest impact over the ages.

Sadly, the church has not seen the need to deal with the same, I think because the leadership benefits greatly from the error manufactured by that tool. The wielder of the purse may have a difficult time knowing the dangers the contents of the purse hold for the rest of the people.

I will not be surprised if I learnt that Judas’ desire to sell Jesus was developed by his control of the purse since his departure to the priests came immediately after Jesus defended the pouring of that very expensive ointment on Him. It is even possible that he started pilfering the contents of the purse after realizing that nobody cared or even noticed.

In short it is possible that Judas was corrupted by the purse, or the money in the purse.

Do you realize that in the Old Testament all giving was in kind? That even in the event the designated place was far someone sold his livestock and went and bought others?

No one in the Bible tithed money. They simply tithed whatever they dealt with.

In short giving is never an issue if we remove money and monetization from the picture.

It is when we monetize food (sugar costs x, milk costs y, flour costs z) that our hospitality develops cold feet.

You also realize even in the social sphere that marriage became difficult when we started monetizing dowry and bride price.

Exchanging or giving livestock was a joy in the past. One side gave and the other side gave and there was joy all around.

But when a price was attached to a cow and a goat and a sheep a girl simply became a commodity that was bought, many times going to the highest bidder.

A cow from the in laws was treated special because it represented a relationship. Where my wife comes from the first cow I gave was given a special name which would always remind them of their son in law. And in many places such livestock was guarded better than the rest because of the ties they represented.

But money does not behave anywhere close to that.

Young people get to love each other and their relationship is monetized when they want to actualize it. Each of them is treated as a commodity and their relationship treated as a liability by one side and an asset by the other.

To add pain to the injury, they are told that even their celebration of marriage (wedding) should also be monetized. 

It is no wonder that marriages are breaking at breakneck speed nowadays. You see they have become a merging of two commodities as opposed to the uniting of two people desirous of making a life together.

I divest. I was talking about money and giving, especially to ministry.

Modern ministers are so foolish as to expect someone would generously give money to ministry when they are not submitted completely to God and will therefore pamper them to hell without realizing that they are increasing the capacity of hell.

However, some know what they are doing and would not mind a hell heading crowd supporting their ‘ministry’ since it also is heading there.

I shared a post recently, showing that there are two causes of generous giving, actual worship or free flowing freedom from the same. But whichever way, money rarely comes easily.

A person totally submitted to the Lordship of Christ has no problem giving money as we see with Barnabas. And a person in a seeker sensitive church has no problem giving as it pampers his ego as we see with the golden calf in the wilderness.

As I always say, people submitted to the Christ I serve will have no problems supporting me even without knowing what I do as Christ will direct them.

Incidentally it is impossible to convince anyone about my orders from Christ as I also have issues understanding some of them since lordship is more about obedience than understanding.

No wonder Paul said we are fools for Christ as some of the orders we receive make us doubt our sanity or even thinking capacity.

That is why it is impossible to convince money to follow Christ’s orders.

If someone who had freely given his piece of land could ‘hide’ some of the proceeds when he sold the land, how do you expect someone give their money just like that? Or have you forgotten Christ’s statement about the camel and the eye of the needle.

Yet it is not all doom. God still has people submitted to Him that their money is completely subject to His Lordship.

Read Job 31 to find one such person.

Allow me to close with this verse

And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations. (Luke 16:9)

Money can only serve God’s purpose when the one possessing it is completely submitted to that purpose.

Infidelity

And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. (1Corinthians 14:35)

I have become a farmer, albeit a very ‘small’ one.

Like I have always said, Biblical revelation is easier to understand with a farmer’s perspective.

I am therefore learning, and many things at that, especially as I study animals and birds in my compound.

I recently posted that a cock has a lot more responsibilities than just giving a seed.

Let me today write a bit about ducks. Incidentally this is the first time I am interacting with Donald’s relatives.

I first bought a couple and we had quite a fight making them enter their bedroom. But eventually they settled.

Then I bought two other females and the battle was in the first day when we had to group them with the chicken.

In the next day the first ones comfortably entered their room but the rest rebelled.

When the male saw that they were refusing to enter, he left his room, followed by his partner and slowly led them to the chicken’s room and from that day they always ‘sleep’ there.

Then I thought that the drake may be immature to give seed to the ducks and I bought a mature one.

The two ducks transferred their loyalty immediately, even having a difficult time getting inside because the big drake would not. It was when he agreed to get in that the struggle ended, after a few days.

Then I got to think about marriage.

Do you realize that a similar thing happens when a woman transfers spiritual authority to someone other than her husband?

They might sleep on the same bed and even continue being faithful to each other but in the spirit the marriage snapped.

And it is so whether that other man is a bishop, prophet, pastor or witchdoctor.

You see, marriage starts in the spiritual and is then consummated in the flesh.

And that is why Joseph was told to take Mary his wife though they had never had sex. (I have written on the dangers of dating due to this)

If your husband is the prayer request you take to whoever, please know that you are being unfaithful to him.

You see, a husband is the head of the wife spiritually before these other aspects come into play.

It means that if you are not spiritually submitted to your husband you are an adulterer in the spiritual realm; meaning that your marriage is already broken in the spiritual, however romantic you may be to each other.

The clearest example we can get in the scriptures is Michal, David’s heartthrob.

When she agreed to being married off after David fled the palace, she transferred her spiritual authority to another, effectively dissolving her marriage to her first love.

That is why much later when she comes back to him she is unable to connect to his spiritual pulse as we see when she is commenting on David’s dancing.

Her father had no legal basis or authority to take her to another man because David had paid the requisite dowry. She is the one who transferred the same to him and later to another man.

Or don’t we see Jonathan going to demonstrate his submission to David in the wilderness yet he was the crown prince and in the army that was looking to kill him?

That is what happens when another man (or woman) is given spiritual reins of a woman’s life. She becomes unable to submit spiritually to her husband.

That disconnect is the spirit is not discerned unless in the spiritual. But it can be felt and its impact seen.

A man with a wife who has transferred spiritual submission elsewhere can sense the distance growing though he cannot explain, let alone understand what has happened.

Then, due to that spiritual disparity, they will start growing apart. And many times actual unfaithfulness is the result with the man many times being the culprit. Yet he is the victim of spiritual adultery in the wife, an adultery he may never know exists.

This is why we have enough cases of hyper spiritual ladies complaining about adulterous husbands. And it is the same with very churchy women.

Their spiritual loyalties are elsewhere and the husband has his spiritual authority hanging. And that low hanging fruit is very attractive to temptation.

Now there is no excuse for sin. But I am convinced that wisdom dictates that we use all the means at our disposal to block all entrances of temptation, and for the woman it is complete spiritual submission to your husband, however unspiritual you might deem him to be.

Or haven’t you read this?

Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. (1Peter 3: 1, 2)

What else do you want me to say?

Stretching the Scriptures

There are religious clichés we have used through the ages that they have taken the authority of scriptures. 

Sadly, some of them are as opposed to the scriptures as a statement from hell.

You see, when the serpent told Eve that she would not surely die, he was not entirely false as they did not die immediately (at least physically). But it was dangerous because it twisted God’s words to fuel rebellion. It was thus a lie packaged as a truth.

One such statement has disturbed me for a long time because it appears all true and scriptural, though the scriptures are really contrary to it.

It says that all sins carry the same weight to God. And I know that you may have even quoted that ‘scripture’ in your preaching. In short God treats all sins alike.

But is that scriptural?

Is mass murder the same as a white lie? Is bestiality the same as bending the truth to impress in an interview?

Does the Bible at any time even imply such a thing?

If sins are the same, why then are their sentences different? Why should one give a sin offering while another is stoned yet another is burned?

But you see, we must protect our transgressions, especially against being pointed out. And what better defense than pointing back by showing that all sins are equal.

Do not judge me for sleeping with someone’s wife because last week you lied that you do not have money because you were not ready to lend to someone who never repays debts (and all sins are equal to God).

In short, that statement is a clutch people use to protect themselves from being held accountable for their transgressions.

It is not any different from the stretching of the ‘do not judge’ 

Like I have always posed, have you ever heard anybody quoting the said statements when they are walking right? Have you ever heard someone using them to defend their right living?

Those statements find their validity in sin and the pursuit of sanitizing it.

Do not be a party to distorting scripture to defend sin and lawlessness. God hates it and must judge it.

Between Which Lines?

But to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word. (Isaiah 66:2b)

Some believers are so good at reading and explaining things that are not written in the Bible. They seem or want us to believe that they know more about God’s heart and workings than He has said in His word.

Some of us, however, are not that bright. We do not desire or even look between the written lines of the divine writ. We are content with what is there as it is already heavy enough to follow. Reading and understanding between the lines is therefore beyond our capacity. And we are content with what is written anyway.

In any case, what is the need of knowing what lies between the lines when what is on the lines is so clear?

How is it that someone who picks the Bible and reads it is led to Christ yet they do not even know of anything in existence between the lines? Were we taught anything between the lines when we believed?

Let me pick a case to get us understand what I am saying.

God hates divorce. And that in the Bible is clear as day.

Yet have you noticed how many will jump at you if you write that statement somewhere?

Where is there so much argument about such a clear statement?

Hate is not the same as being biased against, or ambivalent, or displeased with. Hate is a strong word.

Has anyone ever said they hated you? Did you read between the lines? Which lines?

The God who will hold us accountable for every idle word we speak can therefore not be expected to issue a word that does not mean what He is saying or means.

Please get that into your foolish head and never try to explain something God hates.

Trying to use homosexuality to make it appear less hateful does not change a thing because God still HATES divorce. Homosexuality is an abomination and not the perfume to cover the stench of divorce that God hates.

The reason I enjoy reading the Bible is because I do not try to understand beyond what is written and so am always given understanding for what is written.

But those who think they are brighter take a peep in the darksome places between the lines to bring in strange doctrines to help explain away their disobedience and lack of pursuit for right revelation. Sadly, pulpits are full of them.

I have been kicked out and punished and banished for questioning leaders who did or taught things opposite to what the Bible clearly says. In short I was punished for refusing to accommodate the between the lines theology, a thing I will never do.

And even on this net there are people who hate me because I punch holes in their between the lines doctrines.

I always ask, why look between the lines when the lines are clear and understandable?

And divorce is not the only thing God hates. But it is a good place to start.

Do not entertain divorce anywhere, not even in your mind, because you will then be doing something God HATES.

It is a good thing to start hating what God hates.

Dynamic of Finishing

Have you realized that the church’s battles with the Pharisees and Sadducees ended with Christ’s crucifixion?

What do I mean? I know someone is asking.

Remember all the battles about Sabbath and ceremonial purification and many other cultural and spiritual sparring themes we read in the Gospels? Which of them do we see in the Acts?

None.

The church did not even once have to battle such things. Of course meaning that Jesus fought and finished all those battles and wars. His church therefore started from a point of victory on those issues. Of course because they had other battles to do.

Never again do we see noise being made because a miracle was performed on the Sabbath because the Lord of the Sabbath took back His day. Never again do we have confrontations on the temple because the Greater than the temple had put the temple in its rightful position.

The apostles were therefore freed from those battles to forge ahead with the Gospel unhindered and unfettered by those little battles.

Remember what the apostles said?

Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. (Acts 6:2)

It was a new challenge but they had to deal with it in such a way that it did not detract them from their focus. Now imagine if they still had to deal with battles on Sabbath and ceremonial demands?

They were able to be focused because Jesus cleared those battles conclusively. In short they started a brand new chapter of ministry.

But you will always realize that they also never left any battles they fought for a later generation as they copied their Commander. They did not deal with a case twice.

As an example look at the Judaizers in Acts 15. They have a conference and clear that issue. It is later only mentioned as a reference.

I hope you realize as you read the Bible and live this faith that it is the way Christ programmed His church to operate. We are different from swine and dogs that return to their vomit.

My experience as I have grown in faith and ministry is that God does not purpose for us to repeat lessons, unless we missed them or chose to flunk them.

Incidentally, even temptations operate like that. You will not fight a temptation, overcome it and later have to face it. I have never seen it like that. God’s victory is complete and does not need revisiting.

That like was with Jesus the devil departed to look for an opportune moment simply means that he goes to craft a different temptation and not repeat what was won.

What am I saying?

If you have a recurring temptation or a series of them, it means you have a serious problem with your faith. Either you are not in the faith or you refused to grow and so do not challenge the devil to package temptations as a single one brings you down time and again.

Again, if we have to be dealing with a similar fall or sin on a person all the time, we really are not dealing with a brother.

For example, a sister is always coming for prayer and repentance after sleeping with this or the other brother. That is a harlot. And it is the same if it was a brother. No deliverance (whatever that is) can help them because they have refused to walk in or toward victory.

Let me get to this bishop to get you angry a bit.

The bishop walked in adultery. But let me dirty the water even further by introducing a conspiracy.

He was angry that the girl did not tell him she was pregnant. How does a grownup have sex and be surprised when a pregnancy occurs?

My theory is that our guy is a serial adulterer. But not only that. Once a girl gets pregnant, he has a way of procuring abortion since he has all the offerings to fund it. I won’t be surprised to know that there are more girls he has slept with and made pregnant but cleared those pregnancies ‘conveniently’.

When he got to this girl, she knew (women and girls talk) that so and so was here and got pregnant and somehow the pregnancy disappeared. Of course because there is no way to fix a man (especially a man of God) with adultery without a child because the whole structure will kill you for seeking to spoil their darling’s reputation.

She therefore hid that pregnancy, either because she really loved him or did not want to add the sin of murder to that of fornication. She therefore refused to be smitten to stupidity like the rest.

Then of course when she informed him that she had borne his child he became wild and forgot to reduce his pride and arrogance, giving a lawyer quick cash.

But why are we even dealing with adultery in a bishop? We gave a toddler the spiritual responsibility of a parent. Those base drives ought to have been dealt with in his youth even before he got married.

Chances are that he flossed over them because he was gifted. The church tapped into the gift instead of working on the body carrying it.

And for some time it worked because he was protected from temptation by the busyness of ministry.

Until he rested when he became the head of his own denomination. He had the time to see those figures and shapes and contours and bosoms of all those sisters who were always at his service.

That is when he realizes that he did not grow through overcoming temptation. In short he did not deal with temptation as he was growing. He is therefore unable to defeat temptation because he doesn’t know what temptation is. I will not be surprised to learn he also has issues with finances and tempers

The saddest part is that the bishops defending him are just like him, dealing with temptation just like he does because they were given pastoral roles in their spiritual kindergarten because they were gifted. They therefore understand him perfectly and some are just like him only that their sin has not exploded.

Look at these verses.

But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. (Ephesians 5: 3, 4)

To imagine that we are talking about these things with respect to spiritual leaders is an insult to our faith. Those are the very basic temptations we overcome when we believe.

Yet it is so because we trashed discipleship and magnified the gifts. It is the greatest error the Pentecostal movement introduced to the church of Christ. It became even worse because the other denominations who ought to know better have started copying the error since mushrooms grow faster than cedars and we love fast growing.

It saddens me when I see a whole denomination parading a child as a reverend and even bishop, even giving him airtime on radio stations because he is so gifted. Others are paraded in churches because they have excellent voices or good grasp of an instrument.

Giving a child responsibility before growing their faith to maturity will eventually kill them. And I suspect this is the case with this bishop and his defenders.

When will we get back to what Christ commanded us? When will we get back to discipleship?

For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them. (Ephesians 5: 5 – 7)

Stupidity

There are words I very rarely use because they are very strong. One such word is stupid.

But allow me to use it today on ministers, because I am one

Have you heard ministers defending their anointing and calling?

How many times do we hear them saying, ‘touch not mine anointed’?

What about, ‘believe the prophet’?

Many ministers love being treated special and very different from ‘sheep’.

They love special seats. They love special garb. They love special greetings and giftings.

In short there is nothing ordinary with them when they are accessing privileges.

But let them be caught in sin.

I am a man like you. I have feeling just like yours. I am not special because I can sin just like you.

Incidentally, if some sinner was brought to them prior to his sin being found out, the condemnation that issued from their office was without mercy, especially if it was of some little loss to him or his. Patmos could have been the destination of the banishment if he knew where it is and it could have been affordable.

Choose what you want. It is stupidity to change rules when they stop favoring you.

You need to realize that Moses’ was one small infraction. But because of his anointing that simple sin meant that he would not cross over. David’s sin meant judgment for his posterity because of his anointing.

Never in the scriptures do you see a prophet, or leader for that nature, claim commonality to defend himself. The only thing we see is the example of the incarnation when Christ took our nature.

And that is simply for the purposes of identifying with us and understanding us. And that is the same with us as concerns our anointing.

We do not share any yardstick. Understanding the ones we minister to is not the same as being like them. The standard for our judgment is way higher than theirs like I have mentioned with Moses and David. And James 3:1 says the same thing.

It is thus stupidity to tell people not to touch the anointed and at the same time infer the anointing makes no difference in your life. It could actually be blasphemy.

And for you being led, stop also the stupidity of allowing the ‘anointed’ conveniently leave his anointing when he wants to wallow in the comforts of this temporal life. Call him to the Biblical standard of that anointing and leave him if he doesn’t exemplify a holy life, a life worthy of emulation.

Let me leave it here hoping someone has learnt something.

God bless you. 

Simple English

Sometimes we just need to go back to simple language to get out of the maze of theological or doctrinal complexities.

I write this in response to concerns about a bishop who can’t seem to keep his trouser zipped and his fellow bishops coming to his defense and asking believers to leave him alone.

It pains that people entrusted with the guidance of God’s people can be so casual with sin.

I have been off the loop and so am only commenting on what I was asked.

What do we think when we hear the name Holy Spirit? What do we think when we hear the word spirits? Can those two terms or words be spoken together?

One stands for holiness whereas the other rides on debauchery. One stands for sobriety while the other stands for inebriety. In short they can’t be together in one room (person). Yet both are spirits. It therefore means they are contrary spirits.

And the same applies to sin. The Holy Spirit and sin are opposites. It is impossible to talk about the Holy Spirit in us when we have not denounced sin. Let me give us a verse.

And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: (John 16:8)

Talking about being filled with the Holy Spirit and at the same time being neutral about sin is a contradiction in terms. It is an impossibility.

The Holy Spirit and sin are allergic one to the other. And that is the main problem I have with the charismatic movement. They have shifted the focus elsewhere. We can’t be natural and spiritual at the same time.

You see, the clearest evidence of the presence of something is in its defining traits.

You do not need to smell a drunk to know the presence of those other spirits. The evidence can be got from a very long distance.

Tongues are like that smell that you must get close to notice.

Holiness is what you will notice from a distance, sometimes even before you know someone is a believer.

Holiness is the defining trait of the Spirit of Christ.

Remember the four Hebrew boys? Everybody knew and confessed that the spirit of the holy gods was in them. And I am sure they did not speak in tongues. Their lives were such that everybody saw a difference, holiness in their lives. And it was the same with Joseph.

Remember Daniel’s adversaries’ challenge? His life was so holy that they knew without a doubt that they could not corrupt him.

When you therefore see bishops cozying with sin in their contemporary yet boasting of being filled with the Spirit because they speak in tongues you can be certain that that spirit filling them is not the Spirit of Christ. Incidentally most contrary spirits confer their adherents a gift of tongues.

I remember one day as a child when a mad neighbor came into a fellowship I was in and spoke for a very long time in tongues and I got confused because he was an enemy to our church yet possessed the evidence of the filling the fellowship fronted. In fact he twice threw rocks to the roof, so huge that they tore through the iron sheets. He had some extra endowment to even lift those rocks, of course because he was controlled by other spirits. Yet he spoke in tongues!

The Holy Spirit without a sanctified life is a lie.

But there is something we need to realize was the purpose of the filling; witness.

But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. (Acts 1:8)

And display that is the tongues has nothing to do with witness. In fact Paul treated it as a selfish manifestation when he wrote about it.

Read through Acts and see that any time filling of the Spirit is mentioned Christian witness explodes.

But my point is this, we cannot confess the Holy Spirit leading or filling our lives if our lives are not holy.

I do not care how many you are leading but if holiness is not the defining aspect of your life, from the bedroom to the banquet room, you do not serve Christ or lead anybody to Him. And even the world knows that.

This man preaches like an angel but drinks like the devil. His songs are so inspirational but his life is rotten. His pulpit delivery is so good but his life is full of falsehood.

These are some statements the world makes of us ministers when our lives are not sanctified. We know (though choose to ignore) that with such lives we can only expect Christ ordering us, ‘Depart from Me …’ because we really are not serving Him. And this has given me an excuse to put verses I love quoting.

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)

I recently did a post on why our generation is doomed. You can read it on the blog.

Isn’t what these bishops doing clearest evidence of that damnation?