Correction is a godly act

I grew up in my Christian walk with a skewed understanding of walking in love and being at peace with all men. Somehow, I got it in my head that Christians are to just accept anything and everything done to us by the world or fellow Christians. However, as I read the letters of apostle Paul to the churches, I see a different image emerge. Paul wrote whole chapters that were a rebuke to a person or a church; he even wrote about rebuking/correcting apostle Peter. In 2 Timothy, he asked that Gd repay Alexander the coppersmith according to the harm he caused him. What about “father forgive him for he knows not what he does”? In first Timothy 1, Paul delivers two people to Satan  for blasphemy. There are many other examples. So, there is no one size fits all situation when it comes to correction in the body of Christ or how we respond to actions. I use to also believe that love is an action, not a reaction, but this goes against some of what we’ll see from the scriptures. Yes, love is primarily an action, but also in love is reaction to specific situations. For example, brother Paul instructs us not to eat with a Christian that is acting like an unbeliever; that would probably be called hate speech in our day. Walking in love and being at peace with all men remain commands, how do we walk through the nuances? First and foremost, the letter kills but the Spirit gives light. The Holy Spirit guides us to better understand the situation and what is needed.

When do we correct?

1. Correcting someone is not about having our way, it should primarily be for the person’s benefit.
2. Correcting should be to help the person to be aligned with the Word of God and calling of God. This could be about being in line with the Word of God in how to treat others, an authority figure, a doctrine etc. it is not to be used to manipulate a person to agree with us.
3. Call out hypocrisy like brother Paul called out apostle Peter.

Do we apologize for correcting? I know of someone that finds it difficult to receive almost any form of correction, no matter how carefully you present the correction. The individual typically finds how they are right and what the other person could have done better. Is this the right approach? In 2 Cor 7:8-10, brother Paul did not ask for forgiveness, he was sorry they were sad, but he did not ask to be forgiven for speaking the truth. In this case, the correction led to repentance, which is the purpose of the correction. Godly repentance leads to salvation. Unfortunately, some go down the route of the sorrow of the world, which produces death. Correct with the Word of God, repent based on the Word and there will be godly repentance. However, no matter how well you correct, some will never receive it which leads to the sorrow of the world that leads to death.

Proverbs 15:10 - Harsh discipline is for him who forsakes the way, And he who hates correction will die.

Proverbs 12:1 - Whoever loves instruction loves knowledge, But he who hates correction is stupid.

How do we correct? Correction is based on the Word, not our preference… Yes, that simple. But not from a place of anger or negative emotions. A wise person will receive the correction, but a stupid person hates correction no matter how well it is presented. You can only control you, so make sure not to be one of the stupid ones; Proverbs 15:10b says he who hates correction will die.

Beautiful Savior

You left your throne to die for me
you gave and I am forgiven
went to the cross to cross out my debt
What a beautiful savior

Took my shame and gave fame
Took my grave and gave grace
Took my sin to set me free
The father sees not my filth
He sees the beauty you gave me
What a beautiful savior

You did not have to but you did
The creator for the created
you took my life and gave me yours
you took my place and suffered for me
what a beautiful savior

The whole world needs to know
Know what you have done for them
How would they know if they are not told
Lord of the harvest, send out laborers
That everyman may know
That everyman may experience
The fullness of life you give
That the cross may not be in vain
Indeed, it's not in vain.
In the fullness of time, people shall run...
Run to mount Zion and find
Find the Beautiful savior. (amen).

The truth about the "Daniel Fast"

At various times in my life, I have gone on a “Daniel fast”; we'll talk about the quotations later. Usually, many churches call for it at the beginning of a new year, while in certain places, it is observed regularly at anytime during the year. If you are not familiar with the “Daniel fast”, here is a simple way to present it: it is usually a period of 21 days where a person eats mostly vegetables, fruits, nuts, etc. - nothing processed and no animal products, including diary. During the “Daniel fast”, water is the only drink “allowed”. The practice is based on two passage of scriptures in the book of Daniel, chapter 1 verses 8 - 16 and chapter 10 verse 3. 

The passage in Daniel 1 is where Daniel and his three friends refused to eat the King’s food so they wouldn't  defile themselves. Daniel requested vegetables and water to ensure they were not defiled; after ten days, their appearance was better than those eating the food assigned by the king. Based on this, the king's steward agreed to give the four Hebrew boys only vegetables during their three years of training. It is clear that this passage is referring to a diet Daniel and his friends went on to avoid defiling themselves, it wasn't a fast; obviously, they were not fasting for 3 years. That said, the diet is definitely something that was shown to be good for the body; similar diets have been promoted in our day for good health. 

In Daniel 10:3, Daniel was mourning, not fasting; this is why I put “Daniel Fast” in quotation marks. Daniel never described this period of his life as a time of fasting, but rather a time of mourning. Granted, there are a number of times in the scriptures where people fasted while they mourned (2 Samuel 1:11-12; 2 Samuel 3:35; Jonah 3:5), but when this was the case, the scripture clearly states that they were fasting and mourning. There are also a number of passages that states people were mourning, but with no fasting (Numbers 20:29; Deut 34:8; Deut 21:12-13); so, we cannot equate Daniel’s mourning to a fast, the Bible does not say he was fasting. Daniel also neglected taking care of his body; I am yet to hear a sermon or read on the topic of the Daniel Fast that covered this part of neglecting to refresh or groom the body. The reason is simple, Daniel 10 was not a fast, but a time Daniel was mourning, humbling himself before God to set his heart to understand a vision. Why is this important? what is the point in bringing this up? For a couple of reasons:

1. Daniel’s diet during this time of mourning was not intended to be a guide for a different way of fasting. For examples of fasting in the Bible, please read Matthew 4:2; Acts 13:2-3; 2 Chronicles 20:3; Ezra 8:21; Jonah 3:5; Jeremiah 36:9 etc. These examples are complete abstinence from food for a period of time, not an adjusted diet. Based on these examples, as long as Daniel was eating, he was not fasting. It is only a bible fast if there is total abstinence from food for a period of time - it doesn’t have to be 21 days or 7 days or 3 days; it can be a day or just skipping one or two meals to focus on prayer and the word. There is no other example of “Daniel’s Fast” in the scriptures and Daniel’s behavior in Daniel 10 is consistent with mourning. We also see Daniel fast in Daniel 9:3, he wasn't on a diet here, he gave up food entirely, which is consistent with the examples given above.  

2. There are books and articles prescribing what can or cannot be eaten during a Daniel Fast, this are based on several interpretations of what Daniel meant by “no pleasant food” in Daniel 10:3 and vegetables mentioned in Daniel 1. This is problematic because for people that already consider vegetables pleasant (unfortunately, I am not one of them), going on a fast that is mainly vegetables does not make much of a difference to them. More so, the selection of what Daniel chose to avoid was not prescribed to him by anyone or God for that matter. He decided what was unpleasant food. The definition that has been adopted is a modern creation. The point is, if you do choose to avoid certain foods to humble yourself before God, you are the one that knows the foods that hit home for you, not a man made prescription. If you would like to humble yourself before God by going on a diet of unpleasant foods, what is unpleasant is defined by you and it is between you and God.

3. Daniel 10 tells us that Daniel’s mourning was in the first month of the year; this is the same month when the passover and festival of unleavened bread is observed. Based on the timing the angel provided, it appears Daniel’s mourning started the third day of the first month and lasted till the angel appeared to him on the 24th day of the month. Why is this important? The process of the passover starts on the 10th day of the first month (Exodus 12) with the selection of the passover lamb; the passover lamb is killed at twilight on the 14th day of the first month and then eaten that same night. The 7 day festival of unleavened bread follows the passover, Jews are not to eat anything that is leavened during this time; this is observed from the night of the 14th day of the first month to the evening of the 21st day of the first month. Was Daniel also mourning in recognition of the fact that the month was a time they were to be observing these commands of God, but they were not in Jerusalem to do so? These commandments had to be carried out in the place God had chosen, which was in Jerusalem (Deut 16:2, 16). The Bible is silent on if this was part of why Daniel was mourning, so I am not going to try to draw a conclusion.  What we can say is that the first month is important to Daniel as a Jew; the month, among other things, would have served  as a reminder of their displacement from the promised land.

4. That said, Daniel 10:12 tells us exactly why Daniel was mourning, he wanted to humble himself before God and set his heart to understand the vision. So, Daniel had two goals in mind in going on this diet and mourning: humble himself and to get clarity on the vision. Well, it worked; God sent an angel with the answer to his request. What we can take away from this is, while it is not a fast, changing our diet to something that is not pleasant to us, can be a way we humble ourselves before God. As in the case of Daniel, God acknowledged it (Daniel 10:12) and heard his prayers. Personally, I have experienced God honoring this type of humbling of oneself to seek his face. 

Please do not go away from reading this post thinking there is no place for the Daniel diet; there is, it is a way to humble ourselves before God. Actually, I wrote this post on Day 20 of a Daniel like diet, basically no meat or animal products which I really enjoy. I jokingly call myself a “meatetarian” or carnivore. That said, this is not a fast, it is a diet during a period of humbling myself before God; like Daniel, it was a period where I needed to get understanding of certain things going on and I can honestly testify that I got clarity and answers. I have also heard people say they got healed of one health issue or the other during a Daniel diet, it is not surprising at all; the Daniel diet is a healthy diet that gives the body what it needs and avoids the over processed diet that we (at least in the USA) are exposed to daily. 

To summarize, the Daniel diet is a way to humble ourselves before God, it is not a substitute to fasting. When God leads us or we decide to fast, it is a time to abstain from food completely. 

Please read the Bible verses I have shared in this write up, don’t just take my word for it; study it for yourself with the help of the Holy Spirit.

Shalom!

The Sin of Adam ... the sin of the passive husband

Genesis 3:6 - When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.

The role of Adam in the fall of man is often overlooked... The blame is usually laid squarely at the feet of Eve. The narrative is usually that Eve was alone, the serpent deceived her and she ate; when Adam came back from wherever he was, she gave him the fruit and he ate. This narrative was being shared at a Sunday school class  I attended years ago; after I shared the passage above with the class, the discussion and direction of the Sunday school changed. There is more to this story. This verse shows us that Adam was around while Eve was being deceived, why did he not stop it? Let's say he wasn't even around, why did he eat the fruit?

1 Timothy 2:14 - And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

The verse in 1 Timothy clearly tells us that Adam was not deceived, he yielded to the request of Eve and went along with it. So, Eve was deceived, while Adam, while not deceived, still went ahead and ate the fruit.  While Eve's sin was an act of disobedience due to deception, Adam's actions are more concerning since he didn't have the excuse of deception. Romans 5:19 simply states Adam disobeyed. The only excuse he gave was to throw Eve and God under the bus:

Genesis 3: 10 - Then the man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate.”

Spiritually passive husbands blame everyone but themselves for the state of their home: I wonder what Eve thought when Adam laid the blame squarely on her and God. Adam trying to exonerate himself was a man failing to take responsibility for what goes on in his home, in his domain. Men, we need to rise up and defend our homes against intruders, not just physically, but more importantly, spiritually. It is not enough to go to work, cut the grass or change the furnace filter, our responsibility is much higher. In Genesis 3:17, God puts the responsibility right back at Adam.

17 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’...

God did not buy into Adam's excuse. God tells Adam his disobedience, sin, was rooted in him putting the voice of his wife above the voice of God. This leads to point 2

Passive husbands give in to the voice of the wife when it is clear what God has said: It is important to be careful with this point. To be clear, the point is not that because the man is the head of the home he is always right, NO. The point is when the will of God is known concerning a matter, nothing should change this instruction, not even the voice of the wife. Because, at the end of the day, when it comes to the direction of the home, the man, if he is a partaker, is going to be held accountable for the disobedience - really? yes, really. let's read some verses in Romans 5:

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned— 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. 19 For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.

You can see no mention of Eve in this verses, it is all on Adam. Mankind did not fall until Adam ate of the fruit... Adam's disobedience led to the fall of man. While the wife is the prayer in most homes, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with a praying wife, infact, it is an awesome blessing to have a praying wife, the man cannot leave the praying solely to the wife. The man needs to be a prayer, an intercessor for his home. The husband needs to take his role seriously and not yield to pressure and go against what God has said. 

Genesis 2:16 - 17: The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Passive husbands don't clearly share the vision or direction God is leading: 

we don't see anywhere in the scriptures where God instructs Eve not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but we clearly see God instructing Adam in Genesis 2:16-17. So, Adam likely informed Eve of the command not to eat of the tree. Eve's response to the Serpents question shows her understanding of God's instruction wasn't completely accurate. She responds in Genesis 3:3 by saying "You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die". God did not say they cannot touch it, he said they shall not eat it. It is unclear from the scriptures if the addition of "you shall not touch" was Eve's addition or Adam's rendition of God's instruction. Regardless, Adam was there when she made this statement and he did not correct it. When husbands receive instructions from The Lord, we need to state it clearly as many times as we need to to ensure it is clear. if it is misstated, we need to correct it. We cannot build faith on a faulty understanding of what God has said about a matter. We should discuss God's direction regularly in the home as a way to keep it clear in our minds. the Bible also tells us to write the vision down, make it plain.... it also asks us if two can walk together except they agree? these verses are saying the same thing, we can only successfully follow God as we make God's leading plain and clear, so we do not deviate from it. 

Though Eve ate, what would have happened if Adam did not eat? The seed is in the man! I believe this is part of the reason God removed Joseph from the equation when Jesus was to be born. He could not make use of the seed of the man. Automatically, Joseph's contribution would have made Jesus a sinner at birth. Christian husbands, we cannot afford to be spiritually passive, it is not only dangerous, it can lead to problems for generations to come. Think of what Abraham listening to Sarah about sleeping with her servant caused him? not only him, but the child of covenant God promised him. 

Shalom

The Command to Love (Part 1)

It is often rightly quoted by many believers that we are not under the law… though we are not under the law, there is a commandment that Jesus gave to the New Testament (NT) church, it is the command to love as he has loved us.

John 13:34 - A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another

Many attempt to fulfill this command by just telling others that they love them with the love of the Lord. However, love is not just about saying that we love, it is an action; the command to Love is a command to act. The scriptures say that for God so loved the world that he gave, an action. It is possible to have the love of God and not act on it; it requires purposely yielding to it. it is also possible to do the acts that portray love, but not love (1 Corinthians 13:1). Though love is an action, the purpose behind the action most be rooted in the love of God. Some give for the wrong reasons: to be seen, tax reduction, publicity… the list goes on; the love of God acts for only one reason: for the benefit of the object of his love.

1 Corinthians 13: 1 - If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.

This scripture helps us realize that we can see manifestations of the gifts of the Spirit in someone’s life, but the love command might not be fulfilled. Another scripture explains what will happen to believers that do the works of God without the love of God:

Matthew 7: 22 – 23: Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Not walking in love is a direct disobedience to the command of Jesus to the NT church.  As Galatian 5:14 teaches us: For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." i.e. all the law is fulfilled in walking in love. So when Jesus said, … “I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness”, he was also saying these people were not walking in love. It is therefore very important for the church to understand the love walk from the scriptures, not what the world has defined to be love. Jesus in John 13:34 gives this command, and brother Paul reminds husbands of this same love in Ephesians 5:25:

Ephesians 5:25 - Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her

We are commanded to love one another the way Christ has loved us; the love of Christ is so deep that he died for the very ones that nailed him to the Christ. Not only that, he prayed for their forgiveness while dying there on the cross. This is the same love Stephen showed when he prayed for those who stoned him to death. As we can see, this love does not sound like what is called love today. 

1 John 4:8 - Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love

God is love; this is simply the definition of the love being discussed here; this is the only unconditional love there is. It is nothing like romantic love that fluctuates, fades, and dies. This love never fluctuates, never fades, and never fails. This love is not based on feeling good about someone; it has everything to do with what is done regardless of how we are feeling. This love is not butterflies, but it soars in every situation; this love is God himself. 

John 13:35 - By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.

This love is the indicator of true disciples of Jesus. When we express this love, the world will know without us announcing to them that we are children of God. This love cannot be hidden when we act on it; the Spirit of God has shed it abroad in our hearts (Romans 5:5). We do not need to pray for it, we need to act on it.
 

Brother Paul reminds husbands to love their wives with this kind of love, why? Because this is really the love that can keep a marriage, not the romantic love. If Christian husbands walk in this love, the divorce rate in the church will definitely not be what it is today. Love never fails (1 Corinthians 13:8), so in the presence of this love marriages would survive any storm because the never failing love is present to see the marriage through no matter what... more to come on this in the next post.

In the next post, the characteristic of this love will be discussed in detail.

The truth about tithes and offerings

 

The Truth about tithes and offerings

The comparison between Melchizedek and Jesus is NOT a case for Tithing

Hebrews 7 is a new testament Scripture used to promote the requirement for Christians to tithe; however, the purpose of this chapter is not to promote tithing in the church, but to explain the change in priesthood from men who are limited by death to that of Jesus whose priesthood is FOREVER. Death, hades, and the devil could not stop him from being a priest FOREVER. It is very important we understand who Melchizedek is; let’s see what the Scriptures say about Melchizedek.  

 Melchizedek is NOT Jesus.

The first time Melchizedek is mentioned in the bible is in Genesis 14:18; prior to this verse, we are not told anything about him. The bible normally tells us who the father and, or mother of a person of interest is; in the case of Melchizedek, we are not told who the parents are. The reader is also not told who or when he was anointed/appointed priest or king, neither are we told anything about the people Melchizedek is king over! The lack of this type of records on Melchizedek has led to several theories on who he is.  There is a sense of mystery when Melchizedek is brought up on the pulpit or in conversations; some have concluded that he is a preincarnation of Jesus in the Old Testament, while others have just given up on trying to know who he is. I was one of the people who resigned myself to getting to know who Melchizedek is when I get to heaven, but a good pastor friend of mine asked me the question: who is Melchizedek? I simply answered “he is what the bible says he is”. My friend laughed at my response; because I had to attend to some matters, we ended the conversation there. However, the question never left me: who is Melchizedek? I picked up my bible and prayed for understanding on who he is; The Lord answered my prayer and showed me who he is.  I am going to share this with you. First we need to realize that Melchizedek was made like Jesus; a likeness is not the same as the object it is made like. However, the likeness bears resemblance to the object it is made like. God created man in his image, after his likeness; this does not make man God the father. Now let’s read the first verse where Melchizedek is mentioned in the bible:

 Genesis 14:18 – “Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High.” (NKJV)

 This verse clearly describes Melchizedek as a king that existed in the days of Abraham, he was the king of Salem. The amplified bible elaborates on Salem in parenthesis “ancient Jerusalem”. Joshua 10 also makes reference to Salem and the king at the time, Adoni-Zedek. Adoni-Zedek of Jerusalem (formally Salem) went to war against Joshua with 4 other kings; he and the four kings fell before Joshua. This shows us that Salem was an actual place that existed in the days of Abraham; Salem had kings and Melchizedek was one of their kings who reigned in the days of Abraham. Adoni-Zedek was also the king of the same Salem (Jerusalem), but he existed in the time of Joshua. Reference to Melchizedek as the king of Salem is not a figure of speech or some mystical expression to hide his true identity.

 The name Adoni-Zedek is actually similar in meaning to Melchizedek, it means king of righteousness or my lord is righteousness. Melchizedek means king of righteousness (Hebrews 7:2); so, both Adoni-Zedek and Melchizedek mean king of righteousness, and both were kings of Salem i.e. king of peace. And like Melchizedek, there is no record of Adoni-Zedek’s father, mother, siblings, and genealogy.  Do these comparison between Adoni-zedek and Melchizedek sound familiar? These are some of the similarities between Jesus and Melchizedek, which inevitably they share with Adoni-Zedek who is not a priest of God, nor is there any indication that he walked with, or believed in The Lord God. So if there is no indication that Adoni-Zedek walked with The Lord, I believe it is safe to say that some might be reading too much into the interpretation of the name of Melchizedek to conclude that he is Jesus. As Hebrews 7 points out, there are comparisons to make between Melchizedek and Jesus, but the purpose behind these comparisons is not a case for tithing. Before we go into Hebrews 7, let’s look into some other Scriptures about Melchizedek; I believe this will give us a clearer picture of the comparison the Word of God is making between Melchizedek and Jesus.

The change in Priesthood

After Genesis 14, the next time we see Melchizedek mentioned is in one of the Psalms of King David; this Psalm is also quoted by the writer(s) of Hebrews:

 Psalm 110:4 “The Lord has sworn And will not relent, “You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek.” Hebrews 5:6 - As He also says in another place: “You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek”;” (NKJV)

 The emphasis in this psalm is that the priesthood of Jesus is FOREVER, just as the priesthood of Melchizedek never ended. This psalm is quoted twice in Hebrews 5 to imply the same thing: Jesus is a priest FOREVER after the order of Melchizedek. Under the Levitical priesthood, when priests died, someone else took their place; however, there is no record of anyone taking over the priesthood of Melchizedek, neither will anyone take over the priesthood of Jesus.

Hebrews 6: 19 – 20 “This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters the Presence behind the veil, where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.” (NKJV)

These verses in Hebrews 6 further highlight the actual comparison being made between Jesus and Melchizedek. Verse 19 talks about how Jesus has gone behind the veil, which the Levitical high priest did yearly to offer sacrifices for both the priest and the people with the blood of animals. The Lord Jesus went in once and for all, having become High Priest FOREVER in the order of Melchizedek! We know that Melchizedek did not die for our sins, so there is only one comparison here between Jesus and Melchizedek, it is the unending FOREVER priesthood! Now let’s take a look at Hebrews 7.

Hebrews 7

Hebrews 7:2 “Then Abraham took a tenth of all he had captured in battle and gave it to Melchizedek. The name Melchizedek means “king of justice,” and king of Salem means “king of peace.” (NKJV)

Hebrews 7:2 reemphasizes exactly what Abraham paid a tithe of, the spoils of war; this verse does not say that he gave a tithe of his personal belongings nor that he ever gave Melchizedek a tithe at any other time. To say this was one of many times that Abraham paid a tithe to Melchizedek would be adding to the bible; the bible does not say nor imply this.

Hebrews 7:3  “without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually.” (NKJV)

Verse 3 shows us again the actual comparison the writer is really trying to make here – both Melchizedek and Jesus continue to be a priest perpetually. This verse actually states that Melchizedek was made like Jesus.

Hebrews 7: 5&6 “And indeed those who are of the sons of Levi, who receive the priesthood, have a commandment to receive tithes from the people according to the law, that is, from their brethren, though they have come from the loins of Abraham; but he whose genealogy is not derived from them received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises.” (NKJV)

Under the law, the sons of Levi are commanded by God to receive tithes from their brothers, but Melchizedek whose genealogy is not in the line of Abraham received tithes from Abraham. On the other hand, Jesus is also not from the tribe of Levi, but as we saw earlier, He went behind the veil to perform priestly duties by presenting his blood for our sins. The comparison here is that both Melchizedek and Jesus performed priestly duties that were, under the law, only the responsibilities of the Levitical priests.

Hebrews 7: 8&9 “Here mortal men receive tithes, but there he receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives.  Even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak,”  (NKJV)

“Mortal men” in verse 8 is referring to Levites, not pastors like some have interpreted it to mean; verse 9 clearly states this: “…even Levi …”. “But there he receives them” is referring to Melchizedek, not Jesus as some have inferred. It is important to point out here that the comparison in verse 8 and 9 about receiving tithes is between Melchizedek and the Levitical priesthood, not Jesus. Jesus is never recorded in the bible, nor is his disciples, to have ever received tithes from anyone while physically on earth. With this understanding, we see that the true purpose of these verses is another comparison between Melchizedek and Jesus, HE LIVES! Unlike priests under the Levitical priesthood who die and their successors take over from them, in the case of Melchizedek it is witnessed that he lives; like Melchizedek, JESUS LIVES! He rose from the dead on the third day and he lives forever. The declaration in these verses in Hebrews 7 is that Jesus is our High Priest and HE LIVES FOREVER! Amen!