Tue, Nov 25th - 4:02PM

Tithing:  Foundational Building Block of Carnal Mega-churches

And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he [was] the priest of the most high God.  And he blessed him, and said, Blessed [be] Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth:  And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.  Gen. 14:18-20

And all the tithe of the land, [whether] of the seed of the land, [or] of the fruit of the tree, [is] the LORD'S: [it is] holy unto the LORD.  Lev. 27:30

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.  Matt. 23:23

Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.  Luke 6:38

But this [I say], He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.  Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.  2Cor. 9:6,7

          I have listed here five passages of Scripture, which appear to me to encompass the Bible’s instruction on tithing and the concept of giving under both the Old and the New Covenants, as well as God’s economy before the establishment of the Old Covenant under Moses.  The seemingly strongest argument presented by proponents of tithing today is along the lines that since Abraham gave a tenth of his spoil from a battle with five enemy kings to the priest Melchizedek, tithing pre-dates the Old Covenant.  This being the case, tithing is, therefore a principle that transcends the Law, even though it was a commandment under the Law, and it  applies today for New Testament believers as well.  I admit that there is a certain consistency to this argument, but it is flawed from the beginning.

          It is true that the practice of tithing was mentioned in the Bible before the introduction of the law under Moses.  A fuller implication of Abraham’s tithe-giving is given in the N.T. book of Hebrews.  We not told that Abraham was commanded to give the tithe to Melchizedek, but that he did so willingly out of respect for his office and his gratitude to God for this victory.  To imply that because this O.T. father of faith did this, tithing is somehow a universal principle and a requirement for New Testament believers is to stretch the Scriptures quite much.  Actually, the discussion of tithing in Hebrews, both of Abraham’s as well as the tithe commanded under the law doesn’t really pertain to tithing itself.  It is rather a well-reasoned argument to Hebrew Christians concerning the priesthood of Jesus Christ and His preeminence as priest in superceding the Levitical priesthood, which was symbolic.  In no way is it an argument for tithing under the New Covenant.  In fact it would help dispute tithing and all other legal requirements imposed by the Mosaic Law.

          The next proof-text used by contemporary tithers is Jesus’ harsh rebuke of the Pharisees for their blatant hypocrisy in following the letter of the Law strictly (namely by their meticulous tithing), while at the very same time they were willfully forgetting the very essence of God’s eternal Law.  The Law was given to the Israelites through Moses, it says as a school master, until the revelation of the Son of God, and the fullness of grace that He would bring.  (Gal. 3:24,25)  In this regard, the law pointed to Christ, it codified God’s moral precepts, providing external rituals as guidelines and a constant reminder to the people of His holiness and their need to partake of that holiness.  Tithing, Sabbath-keeping and all the other external requirements set forth in the law served this end.  This is not to say that the moral precepts encased within these ceremonial requirements were done away with in the inauguration of the New Covenant established by the shedding of Christ’s blood on the cross.  In his condemnation of the Pharisees Jesus was speaking of people who were under the law, and pointing out their double standard and blindness to the true purpose and meaning of the law.  The confusion concerning tithing today arises, I believe in thinking of it and the Sabbath as moral, rather than ceremonial requirements.  There certainly are underlying principles in these old Covenant commands to tithe and to keep the Sabbath, but they must be understood and rightly interpreted for us living under a new Covenant.

          Now, this confusion in the minds of an average reader of the Scriptures is very convenient for those who like to build human organizations, which require professional staffing and the acquirement of real estate for their perpetuation.  The Roman Catholic Church is, of course the classic, historical example of such organization-building for the supposed furtherance of the kingdom of God.  All of its many abuses in this age since the time of Christ’s departure from the earth, and its horrible persecution of His true believers should be testimony enough of the fallacy of this idea that large religious organizations are necessary for Christians to practice their faith.  But the self deception of the Pharisees, and of the Roman sacerdotalists and sacramentalists has spilled over into the so-called Protestant/Evangelical churches of today as well, in a number of ways.  New Testament tithing is an essential means for the establishment of large organizations and all that goes with them.  St. Peter’s Cathedral in Rome was built on the indulgences of countless European peasants during the time of the Reformation.  Likewise, the apostate edifices of today, commonly known as Mega-churches have been founded and flourish, largely by the tithing of their members.

The Perversion of New Covenant Giving

          Jesus said, “Give and it shall be given unto you...”  He also made a number of statements concerning the heart of man and its inherent wickedness.  One must conclude from an honest reading of the New Testament that the motives for giving are as important, if not more so than the act of giving itself.  Giving for a selfish reason must be as wrong as not giving at all.  The Lord’s statement here promising a reward for giving should not be an incentive for selfish giving, nor for an assured reward in this present life.  It is clear from Christ’s and the apostles’ teaching that giving must be for a pure motive with no expectation of reward now, but later in heaven. 

But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:  For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Matt. 6:21,22

The apostle Paul speaks of those who suppose that “gain is godliness” and then states emphatically that “godliness with contentment is great gain.”  1Tim. 6:5,6  It is not only the so-called “health-wealth” teachers who are guilty of the “perverse disputings” the apostle speaks of here.  Church growth proponents as well as purveyors of certain, supposedly Christian business principles sometimes are just as guilty of distorting the truths in these verses. 

But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and [into] many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.  1Tim. 6:9

This is not to discount the principle that there are often immediate rewards for giving, but these rewards must never be the motive for giving if the giving is to be a spiritual act.

What then, is the common thread of error that pervades both the modern teaching on tithing, as well as these contemporary “entitlement” concepts of financial prosperity for professing Christians?  It is simply greed and selfishness.  The false notion that investment of financial (or other) resources in religious causes such as charity, individual needs of others, etc., will yield a temporal, rather than an eternal reward is the pitfall that many fall into today.  We can look blindly at the great fortunes that have been amassed of late, primarily by these false teachers, and the corruption that has followed in their wake.  We can also turn a blind eye to the hollowness and the spiritual emptiness of these large churches, notwithstanding their numerous programs to involve people in meaningful activities.  The founder of one of these great edifices here in Colorado Springs was recently exposed in a great and prolonged deceit, and yet most of that church’s members continue on in their corporate “mega-church” folly.  I’m not saying that tithing was the basis for that man’s fall, and I must speak with some measure of humility, as I myself fell greatly in a similar fashion some time ago, though I was not an appointed church leader in any way at the time.  Although large church organizational structures are not expressly forbidden in the New Testament, there certainly isn’t any warrant given there for them.  On the contrary, wisdom and experience would point to the contrary.

          Tithing is therefore, not a concept for those who would participate in a truly New Covenant fellowship.  It is interesting that those Christians who attempt to live in a very practically holy and separated way in this world are commonly derided in many of the so-called “seeker-friendly” churches today as being “legalistic.”  Yet, the legal tenet of tithing is strongly taught in some of these morally loose congregations.  Two statements in Malachi are often cited:

Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.  Mal. 3:8

 (See also Mal. 3:10 for the promise of temporal reward, which was actually a part of the Old Covenant)

Legalism seems to have different meanings to different people, and is employed for different purposes.  However, the imposition of tithing as a command for New Testament believers is definitely a form of Hebrew legalism.  We know that the Old Covenant was a foreshadowing of the New.  It can be rightly stated that the Old Covenant is the New Covenant concealed; and the New Covenant is the Old Covenant revealed.  This is true in several ways.  The Old was replete with external requirements and regulations, whereas the New expresses a new principle of living with inward holiness, not to exclude outward separation as well.  But the outward expression of this new inward holiness is more than a mere code of ceremonies and activities.  Jesus explained it well in the Sermon on the Mount.  Sin is in the heart, and though it is forbidden in practice, it is likewise forbidden to harbor it in the heart.  Hebrews tells us that the ceremonies are fulfilled in Christ and therefore done away.  The Sabbath is an inward posture of rest had by God Himself, and to be entered into by His people.  The externals with regard to activities all have their significance, but must be the result of individual inward conviction as led by the Holy Spirit, not the outward constraint and regulations of men, as was so blatant in the Jews.  Tithing and giving are under this new principle.  Paul states this new principle very succinctly:

But this [I say], He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.  Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.  2Cor. 9:6,7

Certainly New Testament believers are responsible for the various needs in the church and in its appointed shepherds.  However, the specifics of giving need to be determined by the individual, based upon his faith and love, not on some rule, such as an exact ten percent of one’s income as a basis.  Yes, there are those who adhere to this rule of law, and out of a perhaps pure desire are blessed in their giving.  But to lay tithing on others is not Scriptural and not kind.  God’s true work will go forward without the strict tithe, as it always has.

          Finally, we must go back again to the motives of the heart.  Under the Old Covenant the Jew gave out of compulsion, but sometimes with a pure heart in respect to the commandment.  Today, we give from an inward compulsion that is empowered by faith and accompanied by joyfulness, knowing of God’s full provision for us.  Laying the law on people always reflects on the motives of those who do so.  The fruit of this can be observed today in all of the foolishness and carnality of many of the large, Evangelical churches in our country.  We must ask ourselves  whether these super-organizations are truly necessary for the simple Christian life.  The answer to this question will then help us to see what it has taken to erect these monuments to men.  Tithing has had its place in those schemes.

Fri, Oct 24th - 7:05AM

Joe the Mechanic and America’s Distorted Gospel

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (Rom 1:16)

 A Christian man I know owns a garage. I have some little cards with unique lettering on them. When viewed one way the word “life” appears, and when turned upside down, the same word becomes “death.” Subscripted under this word on one side, are “the wages of sin is...,” and the other way it reads, “the gift of God is eternal...” The reverse side of the card contains a very brief statement about salvation and the need for Christ, along with the Lord’s own words that, “I am the way, the truth and the life; no man cometh to the father, but by me.” Jn. 14:6 

 This card has been an excellent witnessing tool for me, and for many others who hand it out randomly to people we meet. It really gives a very succinct statement of the Gospel, though a fuller explanation is needed for the curious seeker when he reads it. The other day I handed a few of these cards to Joe, the brother who owns the garage, and suggested he put them in the customer waiting area of his facility for people to take. His bold reply was, “I would never give anything like that to my customers.” As we walked outside he began to explain to me that such “in your face” type evangelism was not his style, although he seemed to concede that the Lord might use me in such a “bold” way. Well, I accepted his defense for the time being, and left it at that. However, a few days later I walked into his waiting area, and there, nearly blocking the window into the garage bay area, the other side of which he would stand to communicate with the customers was a large poster bearing the names of McCain and Palin, the Republican candidates for the presidency. The “in your face” approach to people with God’s message of man’s need for reconciliation with Himself was “not Joe’s style.” That’s OK, I suppose. But he couldn’t see that this bold presentation of his political view was even more in the people’s faces who patronize his business. 

The inconsistency was apparent to me almost immediately. I wanted to point it out to Joe, so I asked if we could have lunch together, and he agreed. As it turned out I wasn’t able to make it for our lunch date, but later mentioned the matter to him at a business networking meeting we both attend. His defense at that time revealed very clearly to me that the Gospel message that Joe and countless other American Evangelicals believe is really a distortion of that Gospel first proclaimed by our Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles many years ago. In that brief encounter Joe informed me that not only was my method of presenting the Gospel a different “style” than his, but more so, it was an entirely different message, that a “God of love” wouldn’t foist on people. The realization suddenly dawned on me that Joe and most contemporary professors of faith in Christ believe something very different than what I, and a few others have come to base our lives upon. We all, supposedly have the same Bible, notwithstanding the distinct contrast between most of the modern versions of this Bible and the classic “Authorized Version” that many my fellow Gospel believers hold to. We all, supposedly have the same Lord and the same Holy Spirit dwelling within us collectively, as well as individually. Our messages, however are very different at their very core.

I’d like to attempt to define this erroneous contemporary American gospel here, and to contrast it with the message preached by Christ and His early disciples. Jesus’ very first words in His formal ministry were “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matt. 4:17  The definition of the word “repent” seems to be somewhat vague in the minds of contemporary Christians, and is generally omitted from their Gospel presentation to unbelievers. There is a certain challenge to this word that is not only offensive to the world, but also intimidating to the one using it. It implies that I (being the one proclaiming the message) has, or at least intends to turn my life completely around in its direction in relation to God and my rebellion (sin) against Him. I must admit that this is a scary thought for someone who has come into one of the contemporary churches with its “seeker-friendly” and non-offensive draw. He has been led to believe that the Jesus of the Bible is really His big “buddy” in the sky, or as I saw on a teen-aged girl’s tee shirt, his “homey.” Jesus really wants to meet all of his needs, whether emotional, financial or what have you. Jesus “loves” him and would never be so rude and mean as to tell him that he has a rotten moral core, full of self-deceit and faces God’s wrath at the appointed day of judgment. But, above all, this Jesus that our Evangelical friend has become acquainted with is “caring” and has a relevant message for him. That old- time, legalistic, condemning, sin-denying, Bible-thumping message of repentance and faith may have worked for another generation, but it isn’t the pew filler today. No sir! 

What is the true nature of this alternative, modern gospel so prevalent in today’s Christian culture? First of all, it is a self-righteous gospel. The true Gospel is both a command, as well as an offer of God’s righteousness in exchange for the forsaking of one’s own righteousness. 

...but now commandeth all men every where to repent... Acts 17:30

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God [which is] by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: Rom. 3:21,22

Without the mention of the requirement of repentance and faith, and the sureness of coming judgment, the Gospel message loses its power. It becomes a mere suggestion to “accept Jesus” for whatever benefits He might offer. An exchange of righteousness is fairly obscured in today's prevalent gospel.  This was certainly not Christ’s approach to the matter during His ministry upon this earth, nor was it that of Paul in his missionary endeavor. Today’s message is tailored to today’s politically-correct, non-offensive non-judgmental culture. It is not that we, as Gospel messengers should be the judges of men’s actions and thoughts, but it is the knowledge of the certainty of God’s ultimate judgment of all which propels us, with compassion for the lost. Judgment and hell are diminished in the pulpit and the marketplace today, if not absent altogether.  The need for a righteousness not our own is  foreign to our preaching today.

 Next, today’s message is pluralistic, whereas the historic, everlasting Gospel is very narrow and singular in its remedy for man’s need. The little slogan, “Try Jesus” that can be seen on bumpers is very descriptive of this pluralism. “Give Jesus a shot at fulfilling your needs and aspirations, and even curing your addictions!” Even though the exclusivity of God’s way of salvation is supposedly believed by the purveyors of this new gospel, it cannot be explicitly stated because of the offense that this idea brings to others with their solutions. Those exclusive claims made in the Old and New Testament to the singularity of the God of the universe and His specific requirement of blood sacrifice accomplished in His own Son two thousand years ago in Judea on a cross doesn’t leave any room for other ways of salvation. Even the great Billy Graham weakened on this point. He was quoted as saying that those of other faiths might go to heaven too. But the Bible doesn’t state or imply this lie anywhere. 

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. Jn. 14:6

I heard from a former missionary to Nepal that some Hindus will accept Christ and yet still continue to worship their pagan deities as well. Could we in America be guilty of the very same thing?

Finally, today’s gospel is ineffective. This modern, imitation Jesus is supposedly the healer of our moral and emotional maladies, but really is little different than a tribal witch doctor in his ability to cure the wounds of a sin-sick soul. “He sees your pain and wants to sooth you, so let Him in to do it,” is the tenor of today’s gospel. Contemporary society has become deeply infected with the disease of self-love and all of its varied manifestations of selfishness, and we are reaping dire consequences universally. We are even being told from the pulpit that “we can’t truly love God if we don’t love ourselves.” This is, of course in direct opposition to Christ’s plain statement that one must hate his own life in order to be His disciple. Luke 14:26.  As the message goes, Jesus is the one who can heal those terrible relational wounds that we have inflicted upon ourselves and each other. This is a true statement, but not accurately presented. The cure of our moral disease can only be practically effected if the problem is correctly diagnosed and the proper spiritual surgery is undertaken. Sin is at the very heart of the problem, and is, in fact the problem, not childhood or spousal abuse, or any other external factor in one’s life. One’s own sin must be acknowledged, and properly dealt with by the blood of Jesus Christ in order for one to be truly healed spiritually and morally. When this is understood and accepted in the heart and the mind of a sinner, then, and only then will the Spirit of Christ begin to effect healing of damaged emotions and bring the comfort He promises. How aptly Jeremiah puts it:

For they have healed the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when [there is] no peace. Jer. 8:11

Now since my friend Joe can’t quote the scriptures, because that’s also “not his thing,” he has a somewhat difficult time Biblically backing up this new gospel that he silently proclaims to all those around him. I don’t want to be too hard on this poor guy, and must acknowledge that he does live a relatively clean and honest life in relation to his fellow man. But, sadly, there are throngs of relatively clean and honest living souls on their way to perdition. This is not just because of their technical ignorance of the true Gospel message, but rather it is because of an unwillingness to face the self-righteousness that lies at the very core of their being. Misunderstanding a mental concept is not the reason for God’s judgment on a person. Refusing to see one’s sin is, however sufficient grounds to condemn a soul to hell forever. I personally don’t believe that Joe is on his way to hell, but there is certainly some confusion in his mind about Christianity and its basic message to man. Unfortunately, true Christians can be deceived, and I do believe this is the case with Joe the mechanic and millions of his fellow American Christians.

Thu, Aug 14th - 12:03AM

Wed, Jul 2nd - 8:51AM

Tue, Jun 24th - 12:02AM

Religion or Relevance?

For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.  Gal. 1:10

To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all [men], that I might by all means save some.  1Cor. 9:22

The band and “worship team” gave a great performance Sunday morning, led by a young man with an outstanding voice.  In the center of the group, facing the audience was a young woman of Asian descent, sitting on a high stool in a mini-skirt with her legs fairly spread apart, and smiling deliriously as she and the others “led” us in worship.  The audience, with the exception of myself consisting of fifty people or so, apparently didn’t take notice of this girl’s attire.  However, the glaring violation of the Scriptural mandate for feminine modesty was impossible for me to overlook.  The New International Version of the Bible, deficient as it is, gives a surprisingly clear rendering of Paul’s exhortation on this matter:

I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety...1Tim.2:9

I don’t know how much more clear the Scripture could be about this; but when I later e-mailed the pastor about my observations on this and other impressions of his church I was rebuffed with the implication that I might be a “religious Christian,” whatever that term might imply.  He also informed me that it would be “religious” of him and the church to “start” telling the females of the congregation how long their dresses ought to be.  Well, it seems to me that in order to follow God’s holy word in the day in which we live we might have to risk being labeled as “religious.”  The gist of his response as well as the literature printed on their church bulletin is that they, as a new church in the area want to be “relevant” to the culture around them.  Hmmm, very interesting.  It makes one wonder how relevant the early disciples of Jesus were in the culture of the Roman Empire in which they lived.  I know there are some allusions in the New Testament to the believers of that time perhaps on this matter, and their involvement in some of the pagan practices of that day.  They were exhorted not to be a stumblingblock to their weaker brethren (1Cor.8:9), though their consciences were clear in the eating of meat sold in or near pagan temples.  But did they flaunt their freedom to eat this meat, and further did they imitate the customs of dress and other practices of their godless neighbors so they could supposedly “win them to Christ?”  It is clear that they certainly did not.

          Feminine immodesty, though seemingly a very minor theological issue to most in the Evangelical churches today, is really at the heart of the practical witness and testimony of God’s church.  Near the end of First Timothy Paul speaks of “the doctrine which is according to godliness...” 1Tim.6:3.  The statement he makes here, when looked at closely is really quite profound theologically.  I believe what he is saying is this: that any theology, no matter how correct it may appear Biblically, is hollow and really, worthless, unless it leads its adherents into a practically holy lifestyle.  I attended a fairly large church once that was known for its promoting of a certain doctrinal persuasion, which I was very enamored with at the time.  Around the time of the pastor’s sermon, either before or afterwards, I cannot remember, the lady at the piano arose, revealing a split in her dress nearly up to her hip, as I recall.  This spoiled my appetite for further edification at that church.

          The power of visual suggestion leading to lust in the eyes and heart of a man is no different today than at the fall of our first parents, nor at the writing of the sacred text of Scripture.  Equally as potent for evil is the power of usurpation of authority latent within the female heart, as clearly stated in the second chapter of First Timothy.  Without any doubt, the union of these two forces derived from the same source has wrought great havoc in our modern society, and has spilled over abundantly into God’s church.  The fact that most of God’s appointed shepherds and husbands lack both conviction on the matter, as well as courage to address it astounds me.  But, the rationale is “relevance,” as with many other practical matters in the churches today.  What relevance really means is “capitulation” to the demands of a selfish and world-oriented generation that populates the professing churches today, as well as presenting a carnal appeal to outsiders.  “We’re going to have our freedom, and ‘do church’ and Christianity our way, and show the world that we’re ‘cool’ and that we can look and often behave just like they do.  It doesn’t matter what the Bible says.  We’re going to interpret it in a contemporary fashion, not the way those ‘religious’ forefathers of ours did.”  So goes the cry of not just the X-generation, but that of nearly the entire body of Christ today, except for the few “Legalistic Bible believers,” like myself.  This twisting of the true and obvious meaning of the text of the Bible is very much akin to what practicing homosexuals do with the clear passages on that subject.

          But the heart of the issue is not the clothing, or the tongue studs or sensuous rock music or any of the other garbage that has become normalized in today’s churches, or anything else that is superficial to our lifestyles.  It comes down to the question of the cross on our lives.  Are we willing to truly surrender all to God, or is our deep and seemingly sincere worship just an emotional experience at church that betrays the lie of hypocrisy and double-mindedness in our souls?  The question should not be “What will it take to fill our store-front folding chairs with community people?” but rather, “What does Jesus ask of me today in the way of surrender and obedience that will not only help me on my way to the kingdom, but testify to the world around me that He is truly alive?”  I’m sorry if this doesn’t fit into our ideas of “grace” or “eternal security” or any other theological system contrived by the human mind.  I’m also sorry that dying to self and taking up the cross is not a good evangelistic appeal in our “me-oriented” society. (Luke 9:23) I don’t know how we’re going to fill those seats and pay for all of our grandiose church growth schemes, except maybe if we lie a little and tell them that Jesus is really fun and cool.  I have fun, but that’s not why I became a Christian, and it is certainly not my selling point on salvation. 

          O, my friends, what’s it gonna take to wake us up to the true reality of eternal life, and the cost that must be paid by those who would inherit it, because of the price that our Lord paid on His cross?  It took a prison experience and the scorn of society to do it for me.  In His mercy He afflicted me, that I might learn His commandments and truly get to know Him.  What will it take for you, and for the American church at large?  How long can we keep up this game of playing church in front of a bored and unimpressed generation?  Sincerely believing a lie doesn’t make it true.  I learned that the hard way.  I pray that God’s people, those who profess to know Him in truth will listen to what the Spirit and the Word are saying today, before it’s too late.

Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and [that] the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.  Rev. 3:17-19