Moneychangers revisited

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Siloam, Mar 13, 2015.

  1. Matthew 21:12-14

    John 2:13-17

    The story of the money changers in the temple keeps coming to my mind. I feel the need to give voice to this conversation between me and the Lord. This isn’t to say that I am claiming authority, but I am relating what the Holy Spirit has laid on my heart.

    Although the issue with the money changers is certainly that using worship to wrest hard earned money from the worshipers is deceitful and wrong, that is not the only issue.

    The money changers could not prosper in that manner if the people of God kept God in their hearts and acted through the rest of the week to be faithful.

    From my understanding, doves could be bought in the market place using the coin of commerce (Roman coins) much cheaper than at the temple, using Hebrew money. Just as we see market prices rise with demand only to fall after an event (for example, buying flowers the week before memorial day will cost more than the week after); the same happened at the temple. Worshipers would trade their Roman money for Hebrew money (with an exchange rate favoring the money changers), and then that Hebrew money would be used to pay inflated prices for the doves to be sacrificed.

    If the people kept God in their hearts through the week, preparing for the Sabbath, and did not just arrive at the temple and say “oh wait, I need to buy a sacrifice” then it would have been much better for them both spiritually and financially. It is because of their own shortsightedness that the moneychangers were able to extract money from them.

    We should always be preparing for our spiritual needs. This is true not only in reserving money for sacrificial giving, but in providing for all our spiritual needs. This should not be taken to mean that we do not rely on the Lord to provide for us, but that that we should not be spiritually idle and then wonder why the Lord does not bless us as we think He should.
    Cturtle and Lanolin say Amen and like this.
  2. It is like people who play lotto, they perceive they have a lack yet spend a lot of their hard earned money buying lotto tickets when they already have more than enough.
  3. #3 Euphemia, Mar 13, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2015
    Good insight, Siloam. Enjoyed reading this. I can tell that the Holy Spirit has been ministering to you. Thank you.
  4. An interesting perspective indeed

    To ad to your excellent analysis, the "Roman money" was considered by many in the Rabbinical order to be "idolatry" because many of the Caesar's and even Tiberius himself considered themselves to be gods who would then put their "en-graven images on the Roman coins." Thus to take the coins into the house of the Lord was a severe violation of Mosaic law.

    I read somewhere that Tiberius in his conceit even forbade his “en-graven image” to be brought into the bathroom. With the Jewish zealot uprisings regarding Roman money already in place to establish societal friction, this moment in scripture regarding Christ and the money-changers had to have been a substantial and controversial event in Jewish and Roman society.

    I believe that most of the Rabbinical order probably supported the act and would suspect the Sadducee's “ the Jewish aristocracy” to be the supporting legal force behind the money-changers. The Sadducee order also kept the temples.

    A good study would be to investigate if there was contention between the Pharisee and Sadducee sects "regarding who got to sell the doves." Pharisee by Jewish money, or Saducee by Roman money? Also did Christ support just the "Jewish money" or "all money" being leveraged in the house of the Lord?
  5. Peter warned us of such people in the Church today. Their main goal is to simply make "merchandise" of us instead of preaching the Gospel that leads to salvation. I would not be surprised that one day we will see "shopping carts" at the entrances of some Churches. It is just another business opportunity before them, and we are the merchandise being sold on shelf's in which they make their money! A lot of Church s take in ten of thousands of dollars every week, and yet they still "charge" it's congregation a sum to have a women s/ men's breakfast!

    2Pe 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
    2Pe 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
    2Pe 2:3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

    The Church needs to come out from its four walls and do the ministry as it is supposed to be done, in the open where the world can witness the power of God in their mist!
    Cturtle likes this.
  6. Wonderful Post !!
    Thank YOU
  7. yea its like the churches that only take they want your bank account direct debit and if you don't pay up they drop you from membership.

    Heaven forbid you put foreign coins on the collection plate or give alms in secret to the poor or bring food instead.
  8. You could do all other things including bible study or being kind to others and praying but if you don't pay a tithe apparently you don't really belong. Which is stupid, as, NT says we ought to be cheerful givers and also I have noticed a lot of manipulation with preachers wanting people to give and making them feel guilty if they don't cough up. And using scripture to do it, PLUS claiming if you do, you'll get blessed in return.
  9. I have heard preachers say 'God wants your wallet!'
    Um no..if He really did, then all our pay packets would go the church directly and we'd get paid by the church. The early church did not operate this way.

    They had all things in common. Actually they didn't even need money that's why Jesus said to the rich man to sell all he had, give to the poor and come follow Him.
  10. Jesus wasn't gonna keep that money for himself.
  11. #11 Euphemia, Mar 15, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2015
    It's obvious you do not comprehend what preachers are actually teaching when they say that "God wants your wallet". People have an iron grip on their money, when they need to have an open and outstretched palm with it toward God. Everything we have is from the Father, Jehovah Jireh. Nothing is our very own that we should hoard it to ourselves.

    As for the rich man story in scripture, Jesus put His finger on the man's wealth because that was where his heart was. God doesn't expect us to do the same--Jesus did not establish a spiritual "law" that some people think we as Christians now need to revel in poverty. However, for some whose hearts are after wealth, God may address that issue with them in much the same manner.

    Tithing is part of our worship.
    Siloam and Cturtle say Amen and like this.
  12. Lanolin your point about the “wallet” moves to common sense in the context that God does not require or condone a theocratic church, however may I offer some perspective to a good friend?

    First I do no accuse you of perpetuating Communism yet your premise would reflect it "if" you believe in required common ownership. Let us realize that Act 2 was a “common fellowship” and not required common property unto Communism: for one “requires the take” and the other “gives as the Spirit leads.”

    I contend that they did not “commonly own all things” but instead “gave to each other and to the disciples, regarding “every kind of thing,” in order to “give to anyone who had need.” For they still broke bread in their homes, and they still financed more giving to those in need later on.

    Let us realize that Mark’s mother (Mary), in Acts 12:12 still owned her home where they met.

    Let us also examine

    Peter admonished Ananias
    1. - But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,
    2. - And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
    3. - But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?
    4. - Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.
    5. - And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.
    6. - And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.

    In verse 4 Peter moves to a very important point, “it was in Ananias' power” regarding his own property.” Yet he and Sapphira lied about the “amount.” Thus Ananias and Sapphira had a choice, on what to do regarding “their property.” If he would have said to Peter, I am not willing to give all that I sold, then his honesty would have not been in question, yet maybe then just his dedication. For indeed Christ did require some like the rich man to give “all” and maybe this was the precedent. However are we all required to give all, all the time?

    Is it possible that Christ may require us individually to “allocate our property” to a need as the Spirit leads: for Zacchaeus was moved to give half of his property, and Christ was moved by his generous actions by delivering salvation. Can we agree that Zacchaeus was a rich man and that he “individually owned much” after he gave half?

    Is it possible that if a church puts their resources “together” they can accomplish more? Is this not the model we are to draw strategy from instead of compulsory Communism; for Communism is compulsory poverty and is the forerunner to economic calamity and despotism. If the church is impoverished by Communism, it moves itself to a position of being unable to help itself and the community surrounding it. Also Communism empowers the most hideous of demonic spirits to infest a nation with wretched despotism, and crimes against humanity.

    Can we agree that money is not government paper fiat currency; but in contrast can we agree that real-money are those things which have “intrinsic, and exchangeable value (property)?” Without property (real-money) we are disabled to feed the poor: for food itself is a type of money or property? If I grow potatoes in “my garden” and “me and my garden” are the Lords property according to the contract of salvation, then who owns the potatoes (but God). Thus when Christ said “render unto God what is Gods” can we agree that the context is “owned property.”

    Thus paper money is a perversion of money, a form of idolatry, a vaporous perception, and is managed by devilish intervention. Yet the perverted intervention of fiat currency still has some “value by perception:” for the compulsory state using despotic perception allows us to “own the perception in part” which can still purchase real property. For our ownership of this “perception in part (our earnings collected within it)” also belongs to our Master, thus we can still render the “purchase power of the perversion” to Him “which is also our Lords.”

    Thus here is my point, “its impossible to remove real-money” in our way of life, and its also our proper operation from scripture to exchange real-money (property). For property (real-money) is the center of what is owned, handled, given, tithed, exchanged, harvested, collected, sold, earned and purchased. Voluntary exchange is “our primordial survival first and prosperity second,” yet our Lord and Master manages our every micro-economic action: for we are slaves of Christ.

    In Jesus' day there were many different kinds of money. Every person including Christ could not operate totally without money unless one operated totally in the miraculous all the time. Christ and Paul would do both: for sometimes “money collected” would meet the need, sometimes a tent would be sewn for a profit, sometimes services would be rendered for earnings, sometimes an obedient fish would cough up the coin, and sometimes bread would multiply. Do we not also need money to exchange and operate in society?

    God bless you Lanolin for your intriguing point of view that often causes me to ascertain the scripture to furthering study.

  13. Something else that the rich man didn't realize is that had he given all that he had, God would have given him back more in return. And the purpose of people having money like you said was to give to others whom are or were struggling. If the church people, would desire to have what God wants them to have, there would be no poverty or hungry people, because we would be making sure that everyone had enough!
    Great Fiction, Abdicate and Euphemia says Amen and like this.
  14. Beautiful---amen!
    Cturtle likes this.
  15. Far past relevance but the Temple coins were not simple Hebrew money and you could only purchase sacrifices with Temple money (again at a loss) and the Temple treasurers were Ciaphas's sons....generally the Temple priests (of Ciaphas's clan) would reject the common man's sacrifices forcing them to buy those being was big business...the whole den were thieves!
  16. From what I've learned, the doves, lambs and other sacrificial animals had to be acceptable for the sacrifices. This could mean without a blemish in their coloring, or had to be first born, or whatever the requirement. If one bought the animal outside the temple, you had no guarantee it was acceptable for the sacrifice. The priests had the final say as to if it was.
    But if you bought it in the Temple area, it was prequalified, so to speak. Yet another way the corrupt could "game the system".
  17. I agree wholeheartedly, the helpless need us the body to be “able to help them.”

    Yet I contend also that the church will inadvertently destroy itself in society by repeating history many times.

    Example: the body of Christ in error could follow this plan like they have in history in order to engineer despotic and wicked society to kill out the church.

    • Fail to realize that "property" is delegated to mankind by God (including the church)
    • Fail to realize that "money is exchangeable property"
    • Fail to realize that “the church needs to be competitive but honest property owners”
    • Fail to realize that “property ownership” by scripture is “delegated authority”
    • Fail to realize that no authority in the church equals total authority with the wicked
    • Fail to realize that wicked authority will empower a wicked government
    • Fail to realize that wicked government is moved to destroy the church
    • Fail to realize that history demonstrates this cycle of church destruction over and over again
    Prosperity and property are “tools” to reach the lost and help the helpless, but also enables the church to lead a peaceful nation with natural authority. Yet I am not an advocate of heaping and hoarding of merchandise, but only that I am a proponent of abundant property ownership for the purpose of furthering the kingdom and our church family. I am also a proponent of personal moderation.
  18. Um..i dont know how it was in the old days but each generation does inherit what their parents give to them. So we not all born equal with equal stations in life.

    Sometimes our parents had nothing and we need to work to build up something, sometimes the govt gives out property for the taking..I mean land...sometimes we are inhabiting a land that is not ours, but will be one day. And some steal from each other. Its all very complicated.

    But I do know Gods promise to Abraham still stands and that included the land of canaan gifted to his descendants and through him all nations would be blessed. I know Jesus did demonstrate that Jerusalem was the apple of Gods eye as he came from humble town of Nazareth yet was crucified in Jerusalem, the center of Israelite worship. I know God alloted the land to the tribes they didnt actually have to buy it. I know Jesus did not have a house or home he had nowhere to rest his head after giving up carpentering to do ministry.

    I also know that God wants us to look after anything thats given to us, and not covet what other people have.

    Ultimately the land belongs to God. Does it not? We just looking after it.
  19. What this has to do with money Im not sure...all I know is land and house prices keep rising or are astronomical and ppl keep 'trading up' or 'getting on the property ladder' everyone wants to be a landlord...yet..Jesus owned nothing.

    Our citizenship is in heaven and there God gives everything freely if you just ask.
  20. This thread makes me think more along the lines of the commonwealth not communism.
    Nz belongs to the commonwealth, used to be called the british empire. Anyway it is now called the United Kingdom, even though theres a queen on the throne. So who is this Kingdom referring to? Who is this King? Even earthly kings and queens come and go, but they are answerable to someone even higher. who would be that person?

Share This Page