Who's Money Is It?

On the first day of every week each one of you is to put aside and save, as he may prosper, so that no collections be made when I come.  When I arrive, whomever you may approve, I will send them with letters to carry your gift to Jerusalem; (1 Corinthians 16:2,3 NASB)

I rejoice over the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus, because they have supplied what was lacking on your part.  For they have refreshed my spirit and yours. Therefore acknowledge such men. (1 Corinthians 16:17,18 NASB)

Probably one of the most difficult subjects to discuss in church is money.  Simply put, there never seems to be enough of it.  On a deeper, more personal level, 'there's never enough to make me content'.  I don't believe we were created with the capacity to have money bring us contentment.  I just don't think it's possible.  Regardless of the psychological things involved, the bottom line is the same; no contentment from cash.

But it is probably equally true that we have the innate sense that money is somehow tied to our personal welfare.  So, while it may never bring contentment, it still captures our attention on the 'self-preservation' level, which is so basic and visceral that it defies reason.  As you might expect, this doesn't catch our Creator off guard.  Believe it or not, He's very aware of this problem we have.

So, the answer to this problem is a 'spiritual discipline' which is usually approached with a subjective sense of obligation.   All spiritual disciplines are supposed to bring us closer to our Savior by breaking down those barriers we create in our lives hindering our connection with Him.  Rarely are they the exact same for everyone, but there are normative categories, one of the most common of which is money.  Therefore the spiritual discipline involved in breaking down the barrier of focus on money is giving that money to the church.

It's a real fun opportunity to watch people give.  On the one hand, people find every excuse not to give to the church.  They will claim it's a human institution, that those humans running it are flawed, that the money given is being mismanaged, and so on.  All of these excuses, and any others, are just attempts to maintain the hold on that substance we have come to believe makes the world go 'round.  As you might expect, this sort of behavior and belief is somewhat irritating to the one spinning the earth...along with the rest of the elements in the entire universe.

On the other hand, those who's vocation it is to minister within the church are bombarded regularly with the constant needs of the church, the community, themselves and their own families, the world on some level or levels, and so on.  All that funnels through them into a 'supply' that is wanting, usually because of the above excuses taking precedence over the presence and power and love of our Savior.

With all the problems of Corinth (and there are 15 chapters full of them), giving was something they seemed capable of even when it was for a person (Paul) of whom they did not fully approve.  It's possible, and from 2 Corinthians even more probable, that they had a problem sending money away to Jerusalem.  But giving in general isn't part of their problems.  After the instructions in verses 2 and 3 comes a 'thank you' for their gift to him in verses 17 and 18.  Sure something was 'lacking' but it was made up.  They gave something.

So the problem wasn't giving.  It may have been immorality, pride, arrogance, foolishness, even dabbling in idolatry.  But it seems they were doing okay on giving; at least to Paul.  Perhaps it was the three people mentioned who gave any or at all.  I don't know, and from Paul's wording it could very well be. Or it could be that they hadn't, to that point in time, gave or contributed to Paul.  Either way, or any other way it could be taken, at that point, Paul received from this church.

So, the challenge is to give.  Giving is the exercise, even to a flawed group of people administered by a flawed group of people with the trust that somehow our Master and Savior multiplies it to meet needs.  The point is to give, and having given, to release our 'claim' on the gift.  Giving without 'strings', without a say.  Otherwise we've contributed to an investment where we evaluate the return on the investment, and demand a vote as if each dollar grants us a 'share' (the more shares, the more votes). 

For me, the challenge is more to not take my giving for granted.  Sometimes it simply slips through process, and here's how.  My wife and I budget, and in that budget we tithe.  But God has blessed us sometimes with excess and we know that the imperative to 'budget' that particular paycheck isn't necessary.  We can just set it aside and live off what is already there, or so we think.  So, in that situation, we also neglect to 'budget' the tithe.  Because I didn't do the one, I didn't do the other.  Truthfully, I need to do both every time.

So, for me, the lesson is to give as well.  The charge is to discipline myself to make the return to my Master the priority it must be to ensure no walls (or at least that wall) don't get built in my life with Him.  The purpose is His Kingdom, and taking my place in it.  The result will be a closer and more loving and powerful relationship with my Master.  Any other charge, purpose, or result is paltry and worthless.  Holidays are coming, the gifts are expected, the sales and 'things' are pushed into my face.  But my charge is to give, the purpose is the King being celebrated, and the result is a season of worship.  So, Happy Thankful Christmas!

Choosing Between Two Kings

He brought back all the goods, and also brought back his relative Lot with his possessions, and also the women, and the people.  Then after his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the valley of Shaveh (that is, the King's Valley).  And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High.  He blessed him and said, "Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand." He gave him a tenth of all.  The king of Sodom said to Abram, "Give the people to me and take the goods for yourself."  Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I have sworn to the LORD God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth, that I will not take a thread or a sandal thong or anything that is yours, for fear you would say, 'I have made Abram rich.'  I will take nothing except what the young men have eaten, and the share of the men who went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre; let them take their share." (Genesis 14:16-24 NASB)


With 318 men of his own and 3 buddies, Abram defeats the wildly successful kings of the east; chases them around 30 miles after routing them.  It was a wildly successful night of battle.  He brings back all that was carried off, including his nephew, Lot.  Now, as the saying goes, it's time to party.  And, of course, to any party comes the king of Sodom, the royal party-animal!


But also coming out is the mysterious king of Salem (Jerusalem), Melchizedek.  He is "priest of God Most High", or El-Elyon, a Canaanite reference to the chief god of their pantheon (Baal's dad or chief or whatever).  Salem wasn't even involved in this encounter, nor was it all that close to the "Oaks of Mamre" where Abram came from.  Why does he show up?  And who is this guy?


If character is demonstrated by action, then Melchizedek demonstrates character which connects him to God.  He brings bread and wine (a good move when coming to any party), and blesses Abram and El-Elyon.  His prayer connects Abram to El-Elyon and credits El-Elyon with the victory over the kings.  Abram responds by giving Melchizedek a tithe, a sign of submission.  Again, who is this guy?

Melchizedek's name is made up of the Hebrew word for king (Melchi) and righteous (zedek).  Later on, David takes the city of Jerusalem and suddenly there is this priest, Zadok working for him who eventually takes over the high-priesthood (a Canaanite priest?).  So, David is "melchi" and Zadok is the priest.  By the time that David takes the city of Jerusalem, the role of king and priest seems to be broken up between separate people.  Yet the worship of El-Elyon is still acknowledged, and the priest kept.  Interesting, isn't it?


So Abram responds positively to the priest-king of Salem.  His response to the king of Sodom is less so.  In fact, his response is rather insulting, even as it returns all the plunder to him.  The king of Sodom wants the people, but gives all the rest to Abram and his buddies.  Abram says a very interesting thing.  He says that he has sworn to Yahweh, El-Elyon, that he would take nothing from the king of Sodom.  That way it couldn't be said that the king of Sodom made Abram rich.  Wow, in your face Sodomite king!  If he doesn't like him, why come back with all the plunder, why not just his nephew and his stuff?


In the celebration of his victory, Abram differentiates between the guests in ways that were insulting in his culture and would be in ours as well.  Am I too "nice" or rather fearful of what others would think to be so insulting?  Would I stand up for my faith, and risk "ruining the mood"?  Would I refuse a gift that really I had worked and risked for just because it represented a person and lifestyle I believe is in rebellion against my Master?  Abram didn't just say no, he said no because.  He clearly distinguishes between the two kings.  Do I have the courage to do that; to do that when it would make such a publicly poignant and unpopular point?


I'm not in this position at the moment, and I can't remember when I have been.  It's not that I haven't been given success, it's the whole choosing between two kings thing that I haven't been given, at least not like this.  Every day I have to choose which king I will follow, the king of my appetites or the King of Righteousness.  I wish I could say I always choose the Righteous King, but I can't.  In the public setting, in the midst of the party, I want to make the public differentiation; to choose to give my tithe to one king, and refuse the gifts of the other.  I want the wisdom to see the difference, and the courage to admit it publicly.  I don't know when, or even if, it will ever happen.  But I want to honor my Master when/if it does.