The Prodigal Son

Many people believe that Jesus was simply teaching a timeless truth about the love of God for those who have been lost in sin. But if we study their culture and historic setting, many interesting facets about that parable begin to emerge. You see, at the time, the Jews continued to believe that they were in exile. Sure, they had returned from Babylon but the promises made in various passages of the O.T. had not yet occurred.

YHWH had not returned to the temple, the Jews were still suffering under foreign domination, Israel had not been surrounded by her enemies and come out justified after experience a time of trial. Based on Gabriel's statement to Daniel, exile was to last, not 70 years but 70x7 or 490 years. So they're sitting on pins and needles waiting for the Messiah.

Now here comes this young prophet Yeshua announcing the imminent arrival of the Kingdom of God - the return from exile and he's telling all kinds of parables about the kingdom. One of them is about a young son who went off into a far country, wasted his goods but when the son came to his senses he returned to his Father's house. His father actually ran to him. It was unheard of for a Father to run to his son in Middle Eastern culture.

Now, in this parable there is an older son who opposes the return of the prodigal. You might remember that when the Jews returned from Babylon they were opposed by Sanballot, a Samaritan. A first century Jew would have heard echoes of the distant past, the story about of the return of the Jews from Babylon.

Any Jew hearing that parable in the first century would have naturally understood that Jesus was saying that the return from exile was taking place through his ministry and those opposing his return, like the older son in the parable, were acting like Samaritans. God stood ready to embrace them, to run to those who were willing to follow Jesus.

So, if we consider the culture of that day we see that Jesus was not just teaching a 'timeless truth' about God's love. He was making a statement about what was taking place through his ministry and casting various actors in various roles. Those who were willing to follow Jesus, to take the way of peace, were returning from exile and those who opposed it were like Samaritans.

When we consider the setting, historic context, audience, etc. the Bible takes on much more color and contour. The question then becomes, "Having an understanding of the historical context, what are the implications for us today?" Can we say that the shape of Christianity in the first century is normative? Should women still wear head-coverings? These are all issues that we must diligently search out but if we are to properly understand scripture, it is really important to re-think our way back into that culture.

The Crucified Truth

This morning, I was banned from a Christian discussion forum for questioning the scriptural basis for the practice of tithing by modern day Christians. This doctrine, it seems, has become central despite the fact that the practice is seldom even mentioned in the New Testament and not once is applied as a model for Christian giving. A quick glance at the official Church of God (Cleveland, Tennessee) website attempts to employ the following passages in support of tithing.

Tithing and Giving. Genesis 14:18-20; 28:20-22; Malachi 3:10; Luke 11:42 ; 1 Corinthians 16:2 ; 2 Corinthians 9:6-9 ; Hebrews 7:1-21.

Read in context, do these scriptures really support the practice of tithing by Christians? I'm not sure how they might argue the case, but let's consider each passage in turn.

The first passage reads as follows:

Gen 14:18 Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. (Now he was the priest of the Most High God.)
Gen 14:19 He blessed Abram, saying,
"Blessed be Abram by the Most High God,
Creator of heaven and earth.
Gen 14:20 Worthy of praise is the Most High God,
who delivered your enemies into your hand."
Abram gave Melchizedek a tenth of everything.

This is a passage in the Old Testament that refers to a one time voluntary tithe offered by Abraham to Melchizedek. It is pretty obvious that to cite this scripture in support of the practice of tithing by Christians is to misunderstand scripture entirely. It is simply the story of Abraham offering a one time tithe on the spoils of war to Melchizedek. The reason for appealing to this passage by well meaning Christians is to point out that tithing was practiced before the law and is an eternal practice to be followed by Christians.

I would respond by asking if everything that our forefathers did prior to the law are necessary practices for Christians. For example, circumcision was also a requirement prior to the law. Doest that mean that Christians should be required to undergo the right of circumcision? No, it doesn't. In fact Paul instructed the Christians in Galatia that if they allowed themselves to undergo circumcision, they would become aliented from Christ. (Galatians 5:3 & 4)

Conclusion: The appeal to this verse as a basis for tithing by Christians fails. This passage is not evidence that tithing is an eternal principle any more than circumcision is an eternal principle.

The next passage reads as follows:

Gen 28:20 Then Jacob made a vow, saying, "If God is with me and protects me on this journey I am taking and gives me food to eat and clothing to wear,
Gen 28:21 and I return safely to my father's home, then the LORD will become my God.
Gen 28:22 Then this stone that I have set up as a sacred stone will be the house of God, and I will surely give you back a tenth of everything you give me."

The explanation for this passage is the same as the one above. It is simply a vow to tithe by one of the patriarchs. Again, this verse provides no support for the practice of tithing by Christians.

The next passage reads as follows:

Mal 3:10 "Bring the entire tithe into the storehouse so that there may be food in my temple. Test me in this matter," says the LORD who rules over all, "to see if I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour out for you a blessing until there is no room for it all.

Again, this passage comes from the Old Testament book of Malachi writing to the Nation of Israel and conveying a message from God to tithe (as they were instructed to do by the law). The tithe was used to support the Levitical Priesthood, strangers passing through the land, and widows and orphans. These are not instructions to Christians who weren't even around at the time. To use this verse in support of tithing by Christians is simply wrong.

The next support offered by the Church of God is a single verse from Luke which reads as follows:

Luk 11:42 "But woe to you Pharisees! You give a tenth of your mint, rue, and every herb, yet you neglect justice and love for God! But you should have done these things without neglecting the others.

In this verse, Jesus is rebuking the hypocrisy of the Pharisees who neglected the more important things in the law but were careful to observe the minutia of the law. Jesus is simply making a statement to those who lived under the law that though they had been careful observers of the letter of the law, they should have paid more attention to things that mattered the most.

Conclusion: Read in context, this verse doesn't support tithing by Christians. Jesus is simply rebuking the Pharisees (who were required to observe the law) for neglecting the more important matters of the law while affirming their careful observance of the law. Again, this verse fails to provide support for the contention that Christians are supposed to observe the practise of tithing.

The next passage offered in support reads as follows:

1Co 16:2 On the first day of the week, each of you should set aside some income and save it to the extent that God has blessed you, so that a collection will not have to be made when I come.

Here, Paul is encouraging the Saints in Corinth to save some money to help Christians in Jerusalem who were, at the time, experiencing famine. While this provides a good model for Christian charity, it does not support the idea that Christians are obligated to pay a certain percentage of their income to the Church or to tithe.

Here is the next passage.

2Co 9:6 My point is this: The person who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and the person who sows generously will also reap generously.
2Co 9:7 Each one of you should give just as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, because God loves a cheerful giver.
2Co 9:8 And God is able to make all grace overflow to you so that because you have enough of everything in every way at all times, you will overflow in every good work.
2Co 9:9 Just as it is written, "He has scattered widely, he has given to the poor; his righteousness remains forever."

Paul is again encouraging believers in Corinth to be generous in their support of the Jerusalem Saints. Again, while this is an excellent model for giving, it simply does not support the idea that modern day Christians are to tithe.

The final passage under consideration is quite lengthy and comes from Hebrews. It reads as follows:


Heb 7:1 N ow this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him.
Heb 7:2 To him also Abraham apportioned a tithe of everything. His name first means king of righteousness, then king of Salem, that is, king of peace.
Heb 7:3 Without father, without mother, without genealogy, he has neither beginning of days nor end of life but is like the son of God, and he remains a priest for all time.
Heb 7:4 But see how great he must be, if Abraham the patriarch gave him a tithe of his plunder.
Heb 7:5 And those of the sons of Levi who receive the priestly office have authorization according to the law to collect a tithe from the people, that is, from their fellow countrymen, although they too are descendants of Abraham.
Heb 7:6 But Melchizedek who does not share their ancestry collected a tithe from Abraham and blessed the one who possessed the promise.
Heb 7:7 Now without dispute the inferior is blessed by the superior,
Heb 7:8 and in one case tithes are received by mortal men, while in the other by him who is affirmed to be alive.
Heb 7:9 And it could be said that Levi himself, who receives tithes, paid a tithe through Abraham.
Heb 7:10 For he was still in his ancestor Abraham's loins when Melchizedek met him.
Heb 7:11 So if perfection had in fact been possible through the Levitical priesthood — for on that basis the people received the law — what further need would there have been for another priest to arise, said to be in the order of Melchizedek and not in Aaron's order?
Heb 7:12 For when the priesthood changes, a change in the law must come as well.
Heb 7:13 Yet the one these things are spoken about belongs to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever officiated at the altar.
Heb 7:14 For it is clear that our Lord is descended from Judah, yet Moses said nothing about priests in connection with that tribe.
Heb 7:15 And this is even clearer if another priest arises in the likeness of Melchizedek,
Heb 7:16 who has become a priest not by a legal regulation about physical descent but by the power of an indestructible life.
Heb 7:17 For here is the testimony about him: "You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek."
Heb 7:18 On the one hand a former command is set aside because it is weak and useless,
Heb 7:19 for the law made nothing perfect. On the other hand a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.
Heb 7:20 And since this was not done without a sworn affirmation — for the others have become priests without a sworn affirmation,
Heb 7:21 but Jesus did so with a sworn affirmation by the one who said to him, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, 'You are a priest forever' " —

This passage is a bit more complex. The writer of Hebrews is concerned to show the superiority of the New Covenant over the Old. In so doing, he aims to show that the priesthood of Jesus (which was after the order of Melchizedek) is superior to the Levitical Priesthood. He uses the tithe to prove it noting that Abraham tithed to Melchzedek and it was customary for the lower regarded person to tithe to the higher regarded person. Hence, the Melchizedekan Priesthood must be superior to the Levitical Priesthood.

Some readers have stumbled over the phrase 'by him who is affirmed to be alive' in verse 8 believing that the author referred to Jesus as receiving tithes.

Heb 7:8 and in one case tithes are received by mortal men, while in the other by him who is affirmed to be alive.

The problem is, this verse doesn't refer to Jesus at all (though he is affirmed to be alive). In keeping with his comparison, he is speaking of Mechizedek who he had just stated in verse 3 as having not 'end of life'. It is a far stretch to interpret this passage as affirming the practice of tithing by Christians.

In the end, what we have are a collection of verses taken out of context and used to support the idea of tithing by Christians. This misuse of scripture obscures the fact that Christians have never, do not, and will never be subject to Torah. It was given to a single ethnic group for a temporary period of time. Why is it important for Christians to realize that they are not subject to Torah? Well, consider the various sects that have arisen within the Church who each want to cherry pick what they consider to be the important passages from Torah that define their little group. The combinations are endless.

I have actually heard preachers call into question the salvation if those who didn't tithe!

The model set forth for giving in the New Testament is for generous giving. The supreme example of giving is provided by Jesus who gave the very blood that flowed through his veins on behalf of others. With this example in mind, I urge you to give generously. But please don't take scriptures out of context to support a doctrine that has no scriptural basis.

Was Jesus REALLY Married? Yes, Yes he Was!

Ever notice that Jesus went around feasting with sinners? My, oh my, what could it mean? Maybe it was that the BRIDEGROOM was getting married. Remember what Jesus first miracle was? That's right! He made lots and lots of wine for a MARRIAGE FEAST! That, my friends, is what we here in the south call a CLUE. You see YHWH had divorced his people in the Old Testament. Read Jeremiah. But now, through the actions of Jesus, God was getting MARRIED. If in doubt, read Ephesians five and call me in the morning.

Building a Kingdom

Any leader worth his salt seeking to build a kingdom has led the charge with a building program. The Egyptian and Myan pyramids, the ruins in Rome, the ziggarets of Babyon...all stand in silent testimony to the fact that the greatest kingdoms were established by builders. What is needed for a builder is wisdom. Both Jews and Greeks living at the time of Jesus understood this fact. As I understand it, the word that captured this principle for both Jews and Greeks was 'logos' - the same word chosen to describe Jesus by the author of the gospel of John.

This has interesting implications for the history of the temple among the Jewish people. It was originally constructed by Solomon, renowned for his wisdom. First destroyed by the Babylonians, the temple was later partially re-constructed by those returning from the exile and was being completed by Herod when Jesus walked the earth. Jesus, announcing a new kingdom, predicted the destruction of this beloved temple within a generation of his announcement. Not one stone would be left upon another. The mosque that current stands atop the Temple Mount attests to the accuracy of Jesus' words.

But, having inaugerated a new kingdom, what great building has King Jesus left us? The answer would seem to be...nothing. That is until you realize that Jesus rebuilt the dwelling place of God - the new temple. Predicting the destruction of the temple, Jesus also spoke of HIS rebuilding of it...he spoke of his body. God's true dwelling place is not in stones and bricks but in the heart of man. Those who are in Christ ARE the temple.

"I Am the Resurrection"

In John, Jesus intimates to Mary that he is the resurrection. Think about that for a second. The resurrection is THE eschatological event. Jesus is THE resurrection - he is THE eshcatological event. This idea is supported by Paul in Romans Chapter one when referring to the resurrection of Jesus as the resurrection of the dead (plural). Subsequent to the resurrection of Jesus, John indicates that the claim by some that the resurrection had already occurred was overthrowing the faith of some.

So how are we to reconcile the idea that Jesus was the eschatological event with the fact that the resurrection is yet to occur? Well, take a look at 1 Corinthians 15. Apparently, Paul understood that this eschatological event had split into two. Oddly, there would be two 'ends'. The end that began with the resurrection of Jesus will culminate in the resurrection of our mortal bodies when Jesus appears and defeats the last enemy - death. Got it? Good.

Evolution and the Bible

There was a point in my life that I would have automatically dismissed as beyond the pale anyone claiming the title of 'Christian' while simultaneously subscribing to belief in the theory of evolution...but times have changed. That's not to say that I have reached a conclusion on the matter - only that I can understand how one could hold these sets of beliefs together.

How so? - you might ask. Well, this is impossible for those who are committed to a wooden and literal interpretation of scripture. I am not. Why? Because the Bible simply wasn't written that way. Remember well the words of Peter who applied Joel's prophecy of the eschatological Day of the Lord to the events of Acts chapter two. Read it with wooden literalism and you will read it awry. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit was indeed the eschatoligical event prophesied by Joel. Both Peter and Joel understood the nature of apocalyptic language - impregnating current events with cosmic disturbances.

Do I now subscribe to the theory of evolution? Nope, I don't. But there is room under my theological umbrella for those who disagree. To borrow an analogy from Chesterton, it is no less miraculous for a man to turn into a pig whether the transformation takes five minutes or five hundred years. We should learn well the lessons of history and claim as our ancestors the prophets and not those who persecuted the prophets. Science and Christianity, rightly understood, are not opposed but complimentary. May God give us the grace to use our BRAINS.

The Cure for Warts - Castor Oil

As a child, I was embarrassed to have a large patch of warts that covered the heel of the palm on my left hand. My mother took me to a doctor who prescribed a salve which I would rub on my palm at night before encasing my hand in a plastic shroud of Saran Wrap (boy that made for a good night's sleep too ). Several weeks went by with no discernible results.

Finally, my mother heard of a cure from a friend of hers who using suggested Castor Oil. HUH? Well - it worked! Each night I would rub Castor Oil on my warts and within a few weeks they had completely disappeared! I recently recommended this cure to someone near and dear who has a son with warts and it worked for them also. Sooooo....if you are suffering from warts give it a shot...it's cheap, effective, and might just spare you your child the embarrassment of having warts.

P.S. I don't sell Castor Oil...I just want you to know how to cure warts.

Arthur Burk - Cult Leader

Arthur Burk, founder of Plumbline Ministries, is the antithesis of one who seeks to know God through the diligent study of his word and the worst nightmare of those with loved ones trapped the snare of his delusions. Just who is Arthur Burk? Well...that's a good question. I first heard the name of this enigmatic figure mentioned by a woman in my Church who, at the time, gravitated towards the highly mystical and hyper-spiritual teaching of the modern day 'prophetic' movement.

Concerned, I began to research Arthur Burk and his teaching on the Internet. It didn't take long to realize two things. The first thing is that Mr. Burk should probably be committed to a mental institution. The preposterous nature of the ideas espoused and promoted by Burk are symptomatic of a man who has lost all touch with reality - a characteristic shared with other cult leaders like the late L. Ron Hubbard who invented Scientology.

One prominent characteristic of a cult is the formation of an esoteric vocabulary - inventing words and catchphrases that are meaningless to outsiders but which make the initiated feel like a part of the group. Mr. Burk establishes such a vocabulary through the endless discovery of new and exciting aspects of spiritual activity including Ley Lines (imaginary highways along which demons travel), portals (imaginary gateways between the physical and spiritual realm), and up-spouts (demonic elevators).

Needless to say, these ridiculous ideas would be dismissed out of hand by mature Christians who are well versed in scripture and familiar with orthodox Christian beliefs. After all, the ideas promoted by Arthur Burk have absolutely no basis in scripture. Ley lines exist only in the minds of Arthur Burk, the minds of his followers, and the minds of those involved in the occult (that's actually where the idea of 'ley lines' originated).

This leads to my second point. Based on the volume of hits to this blog by those seeking information about Mr. Burk, he has gained quite an international following. And that's why I have written today's post. It is a warning to those who would be deceived by Arthur Burk and for those with loved ones who have fallen under his spell. You should be aware that those who followed false prophets in the Old Testament suffered the same fate as the false prophets themselves. Ignoring truth comes with a price. The price? - a depraved mind - a mind that is disqualified to think clearly about God - a mind like Arthur Burk's.

The Truth About Death

Death is a tragedy...a monster that has invaded God's good creation. If you are familiar with the Bible you may already know that God loves his creation. That's right - he made it and he likes it. In fact, he loves it.

But sin, corruption, and death have permeated it causing worldwide havoc. This begs the question of the existence of evil in this world. How can a good God allow evil to run amok unabated? For those who ask this question I offer this explanation.

The presence of such evil in the world is the price of love. You see, love requires the ability to choose. God could have made robots who had no choice but he didn't. Instead he chose to make us humans in his image with the capacity to choose. As the Apostle John said "God is love". When we choose to love, we reflect the very nature of God. To choose otherwise is evil.

The first man, Adam, made the wrong choice as did all who followed with the exception of one man. At every turn Jesus Christ made the right choice. Jesus chose to die on a cross...to bear the weight of the sin and injustice that has corrupted his good creation...and to act as a representative for those who choose to follow him. In so doing, God has dealt with the sin and evil that affects his good creation. If you think that God is indifferent to the suffering and oppression of the world, if you think of God as a vacant landlord - think again.

In the actions of Jesus, God defeated the nexus powers of sin and death. They were condemned on the cross. How can we be sure that sin and death were defeated? Because death was unable to bind Jesus Christ. He went through death and out the other side! He rose from the grave with an indestructible body...the kind of body that can never die again...the kind of body he promises to all who place their trust in him.

Having been faithful to his Father, Jesus was crowned as the King of all creation and is now Lord of all the earth! Jesus has defeated death! This, my friends, is the good news of the gospel.

Recapitulating the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ

It has been my contention for some time that, based on doctrinal error perpetuated through the centuries, vast segments of the Church misunderstand the teaching of scripture. I have made it a personal mission to rectify the situation through in-depth study and teaching. This effort has largely met with stiff resistance, anger, and persecution by those who claim to comprise the Church. Believing that, by virtue of the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, the Church should love and embrace the truth, this response has been quite puzzling to say the least.

Today, however, a conversation with a good friend is beginning to shed some light for me. His statement was that the Church seems to be repeating the mistakes of Israel in the first century. I have recognized this same unsettling truth in the past but only as it related to understanding the message of scripture. What clicked for me today is that Jesus was rejected by HIS OWN PEOPLE. In Romans 8:29 Paul disclosed the fact that Christians are being conformed to the image of Christ. A few verses earlier, Paul had qualified what he meant when he spoke of God's children saying "...if indeed we suffer with him so we may also be glorified with him."

Paul then proceeded to minimize the weight of the present suffering with the hope of glory that awaits those who share in this same paradoxical pattern of suffering. It takes but a moment's reflection to understand that the image to which we are being conformed is of a crucified Messiah who, again, was rejected BY HIS OWN PEOPLE. Though this is a tendentious hypothesis, I think I now understand the recent events in my life of having experienced light affliction...which is but for a moment...at the hands of my own people.