NEW TESTAMENT TITHING

Tithing is commonplace in the Body of Christ today.  Is it supposed to be that way?  Yes, and no.

Yes, if done according to the New Testament.

No, if done according to the way it is commonly taught by many, especially in the HAW-WOF (Health And Wealth - Word of Faith) circles. You know, you have to tithe, or you will be cursed.  That is legalism, trying to put people under the Law of Moses that don't belong there.

Well, what is the New Testament way?  I am glad you asked me that... Let's see what the NT says about tithing.

What Jesus said about tithing

In the accounts of the Widow's Mite, the texts incidentally mention that Jesus watched as people placed tithes and donations into the collection box in the Temple.  This was a normal practice at the time, under the Old Covenant.

But this passage gives us a more meaningful glimpse:

Luke 11:37-44 Legacy Stantard Bible

Now when He had spoken, a Pharisee asked Him to have a meal with him.  And He went in and reclined at the table.  But when the Pharisee saw it, he marveled that He had not first aceremonially washed before the meal.

But the Lord said to him, “Now you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but inside of you, you are full of robbery and wickedness.  You foolish ones, did not He who made the outside make the inside also?  But give that which is within as charity, and then all things are clean for you.

“But woe to you Pharisees!  For you pay tithe of mint and rue and every kind of garden herb, and yet disregard justice and the love of God, but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.

"Woe to you Pharisees!  For you love the best seat in the synagogues and the respectful greetings in the marketplaces.  Woe to you! For you are like concealed tombs, and the people who walk over them are unaware of it.”

Jesus tells us the Pharisees went to painstaking extremes to fulfill their obligation to tithe, but neglected the more important issues of the heart.

Tithing under the Law of Moses applied mostly to crops.  The Pharisees, whether or not they owned farms, orchards, or vineyards from which they would tithe, they might also have grown herbs in their homes the way many do today.  They made sure to keep track of how much their herb gardens produced, so they could give a tenth of their "crop."

Jesus just pointed out that in going to such extremes to keep the Law, they forgot more important issues, like justice and love.  So, if a "pastor" talks more about "tithes and offerings" than he does about heart issues, you should probably wonder about who he is following, the Pharisees, or Jesus.

What the Apostles said about tithing

The Acts of the Apostles does not mention tithing.  I am sure the first disciples tithed, if the Old Testament tithe applied to them, because they were Jews who still saw themselves as Jews.  But even when Gentiles began to believe in Jesus, the Apostles never said anything about them having to tithe.

Paul's letters do not say anything about tithing, not even when the issue about Gentile disciples keeping the Law came up.

No one knows for sure who wrote the letter to the Hebrews.  Many say Paul wrote it.  I can see Paul being involved, because the next to last verse in the book mentions that Timothy was just released from jail.  My personal view is that it was written by a committee, and Paul was on it.  Any speculation about who the other contributors are is just that: speculation, conjecture, guesswork.

I go into that because Hebrews was written to Jewish disciples who were beginning to experience persecution from the Roman government.  They could escape the persecution by rejecting Jesus and claiming to be just Jews.  Judaism was protected by Roman law.

The writers wanted to encourage the Jewish disciples to stay faithful to Jesus while facing persecution, whether it came from government or religious authorities.

The writers focused on showing that Jesus is better than elements of Judaism: angels, Moses, the Old Covenant, the temple, the priesthood, etc.  When it came to the priesthood, they wrote this:

Hebrews 7:1-8 LSB

For this Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of the Most High God, who met Abraham as he was returning from the slaughter of the kings and blessed him, to whom also Abraham apportioned a tenth part of all, was first of all, by the translation of his name, king of righteousness, and then also king of Salem, which is king of peace.  Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest continually.

Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the spoils.

And those indeed of the sons of Levi, who receive the priest’s office, have a commandment in the Law to collect a tenth from the people, that is, from their brothers, although these are descended from Abraham.  But the one whose genealogy is not traced from them had collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed the one who had the promises. But without any dispute the lesser is blessed by the greater.  And in this case mortal men receive tithes, but in that case one receives them, of whom it is witnessed that he lives on.

That passage shows us that the Levitical priests, while still in the loins of Abraham, tithed to a priest of a superior order, the one Jesus belongs to.  When did this happen? Before the Law!  This even happened before God changed his name from Abram to Abraham:

Genesis 14:17 - 24 LSB

Then after he came back from striking down 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 aGod Most High. Then he blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram of aGod Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, Who has delivered your enemies into your hand.”

Then he gave him a tenth of all.

And the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give the people to me, but take the possessions for yourself.”

Then Abram said to the king of Sodom, “I have raised my hand to Yahweh God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth, that I will not take a thread or a sandal strap or anything that is yours, so that you would not 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.”

So, disciples of Jesus are not obligated to tithe.  If you desire to tithe on your income, you can do so.

If you choose to tithe, don't follow the model of the Law, as if you have to continue tithing forever. I recommend the model of Abram:

1. Abram tithed voluntarily.  He did this only once that we know of.  Even if you make tithing your regular practice, you still have the option to not tithe.

2. Abram's tithe was an act and a statement of faith.  His exchange with the king of Sodom shows his mindset in this event.  He saw himself as one bound to God in a covenant, and God was his provider, not man.

THE RICH YOUNG RULER - A STUDY IN HUMILITY.

If you have been in Christian circles for a while, you have probably heard this episode in the life of Jesus as an example of someone who didn't make it to heaven.  I've had a problem with that interpretation, and, after considering factors that no one else presents, I now have a different view.

Luke 18:18 - 30 Legacy Standard Bible

And a ruler questioned Him, saying, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”

And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good?  No one is good except God alone.  You know the commandments, ‘Do not commit adultery,  Do not murder, Do not steal,  Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.’ "

And he said, “All these things I have kept from my youth.”

And when Jesus heard this, He said to him, “One thing you still lack: sell all that you possess and distribute it to the poor, and you shall have treasure in heaven. And come, follow Me.”

But when he heard these things, he became very sad, for he was extremely rich.  And Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God!  For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

And those who heard it said, “Then who can be saved?”

But He said, “The things that are impossible with people are possible with God.”

And Peter said, “Behold, we have left all that is our own and followed You.”

And He said to them, “Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, who will not receive many times more at this time and in the age to come, eternal life.”

I recommend you also read the other accounts in Matt. 19: 16 - 30 and Mark 10:13 -16.  They contain valuable information that I will mention in this article.

Mark's record said the young ruler knelt before Jesus.  That is an act of submission and humility.  How many of us started our relationship with Jesus that way?  (Those crickets are getting loud, aren't they?)

The deeper meaning of the initial exchange between Jesus and the young man is something we often miss, because we don't consider the cultural context.  Jesus and the man were Jews.  They thought, talked, and acted like Jews.

The young man called Jesus good.  Jesus replied that only God was good.  Was Jesus correcting him, or was He implying something?

Deuteronomy 6:4 - 5 LSB

“Hear, O Israel! Yahweh is our God, Yahweh is one!  You shall love Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might."

These two verses are central to the Jewish faith.  They are to the Jews what John 3:16 is to Christians.  The Jews call them the Shema, from the Hebrew word for "hear."

That statement that "Yahweh is one," not only means not only one being, but the only One Being!  Jesus was asking the rich young ruler, "By calling Me good, are you calling me God?  Are you recognizing my divinity?"

Well, did he?  Did he recognize Jesus as God?  Did he really humble himself?

I believe he did.

Why do I think he did?  Geography, and chronology.  In other words, where and when this took place says a lot about this event.

 Map of Judea Province

I confess,  I like to look at maps, even Bible maps.  Not too often do preachers or teachers refer to maps or terrain or locations but some do like to organize, promote, and conduct tours of the Holy Land.  I wish more people paid attention to the the layout of the area.  They don't have be as nerdy about maps as I am.  I just want people to know and understand truth.

In the map I linked above, locate the region of Galilee towards the top.  Now picture a line starting on the east (right) side of the Sea of Galilee going south (down) to just above the north end of the Dead Sea.  Now imagine the line going west (left) across the Jordan River to to Jericho.  Continue the line to Jerusalem.

That is the route that Galilean Jews would take to Jerusalem.  They went that way to avoid passing through Samaria.

This matters because Jesus was on His way to Jerusalem...for the very last time!  He met the young ruler before He crossed the Jordan.  We know this because in the next two events we see Jesus at Jericho, then He enters Jerusalem.

Back to the story.  We know Jesus tells the young man to keep the commandments.  He says BTDT, however they said that in first century Aramaic, but still no tee-shirt.  Jesus says more and the man leaves.

This is where the typical assumption is made, that the guy failed to make heaven because he LEFT.

But, what was the first thing Jesus said?  In the other accounts, the very first thing Jesus said was "go."  So, when he left, was he intending to do what Jesus said?

I believe he was.  Why do I think that?  Because of HOW he left.

Again, Matthew and Mark add information.  M&M (now I got you thinking about candy, don't I) say the man went away grieving.  Why does that matter?

Grief isn't just sorrow, it is sorrow felt at a loss.  Let me illustrate...

Let's say you are driving down a busy street or highway, and you approach a traffic accident.  You pass by, and you can see signs that someone has been injured.  You feel sorry for them.

Now imagine that you recognize a car that was in that accident.  Close to that car is a coroner's vehicle, and responders are loading a body into it.  You realize you know the deceased, and you start to grieve.

Back to the story again.  Why would someone grieve over property he intended to keep?

Another argument made for the traditional interpretation is that the rich young ruler is not mentioned again in the New Testament.  Well, we need to consider the time factor again, along with some cultural background.

The man had a lot to sell, and that included land.  He most likely held an appointed position in the government.  They usually gave official posts only to landowners.  That was a common custom throughout history until the last couple of centuries.  We have no idea how much time he would need to sell everything, then give the money to the poor, then come back to follow Jesus.

This encounter probably happened 2 or 3 days before the Triumphant Entry.

As the man left, Jesus compares the entry of the rich into the Kingdom of God to the passing of a camel through a needle's eye.  I'm not going to rehash that statement.  All it means is that getting the rich to have a relationship with God will be very difficult.  The major moral problem for rich people is not greed, but pride.  Pride in what they own, what they have accomplished, what they can do with their wealth.

Jesus didn't say it was impossible, just extremely difficult.  Difficult enough to require God's grace.  Another way to say it is, true repentance requires humbling yourself as you recognize not only God's immense power, but His vast love and grace.

A PHARISEE, A PUBLICAN, CHILDREN, AND A RICH YOUNG RULER

What do these have in common?  First of all we find them in Luke 18:9 - 30. These verses all have a common theme: humility.

This article will deal with the first three, as the last one will require a post of its own.

The Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican

And He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector.  The Pharisee stood and was praying these things to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.  I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’  But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his chest, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’  I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other, for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Luke 18:9 - 14. Legacy Standard Bible

Who were these men?

If you haven't heard, the Pharisees were a sect within Judaism that put an emphasis on keeping the law of Moses.  This emphasis goes back to when the Jews returned from the Babylonian Exile.

Before the Exile, the Jews saw themselves as God's people; living in God's land; their capital, Jerusalem, was God's city; and within that city was God's house, the Temple.  They saw the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, and the Exhile as God's judgment on them for not keeping the law.

Tax collectors were called pupblicans under the Roman Empire, but they were not on the government payroll.  They were contractors.  They would pay the tax for a given jurisdiction, a city or a district, and then recover that plus a little bit extra from the people.  They got to keep that extra for their pay.

The Roman government would specify how much that extra was.  But, the tax collectors would tell the people a larger amount than what the government specified.

That was fraud, but the people couldn't do much about it.  The tax collectors would be granted Roman citizenship, and so they had the backing of the Roman Army.

Most of the tax collectors in the province of Judea were Jews.  The taxes they collected financed the government operations in the region, from the army to building projects, including pagan temples.  The other Jews didn't like seeing their money go to pagan temples, so they saw the tax collectors as traitors to God and His people

What did these men have in common, besides being Jews?

They most likely were rich.  The Pharisees made a show of their religion, and people supported them for it, having been deceived into believing these "holy men" deserved to receive money.  The publican took his by force of law.

Rich people like to spend money on nice things.  The best food, housing, clothes, furniture and furnishings.  Also entertainment, including the proverbial wine, women, and song.

What was the major difference between these men?

Pride, humility, and how they saw God.

The Pharisee saw God as a God of Judgment.  When he looked into the Old Testament, he saw God acting in judgment, from the Garden of Eden, to the Babylonian Exile.  When he looked at himself, he thought he was safe from judgment not just because he kept the law, but because his "devotion" to God went beyond the law and even the Jewish traditions.  When he "prayed" he didn't talk TO God, he talked AT God.  That is, he assumed God would hear him because of his righteousness.  Self-righteousness is spiritual or religious pride.

The tax collector knew God was a God of Judgment, but he also saw God as a God of Mercy.  When he looked into the Old Testament, he saw God acting in mercy every time he saw Him acting in judgment.

His view of God caused him to humble himself, and ask God for mercy.  And he received mercy!

I see these two men in the Temple.  The Pharisee is standing up, ramrod straight, nose up in the air, and speaking in a loud voice, not because he wants God to hear him, but so he would impress the people.

The tax collector is probably leaning up against one of the pillars at the edge of the Temple.  His eyes are bleary, his head is pounding from a hangover, and his stomach is doingsomersaults, back flips, cartwheels, and pirouettes all at the same time.  He knows he can't  deny what he has done, or what he is.  But he also knows God will hear him! That is why he cried out for mercy.

What about the children?

In verses 15 through 17, Jesus rebukes His disciples for preventing people form bringing their children to Him.  He goes on to use children as an example of humility.  Notice, the children did not come on their own.  Their parents brought them.  The parents wanted blessings for their children, and so the children submitted to their parents first.  Jesus implies that as children in humility submit to loving parents, so we must humble ourselves to God as our loving 

Father to be part of His Kingdom.

Most false religions, doctrines, and practices have a false view of God.  A true view of God leads to humility.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD AND CULTS

I keep hearing about how cult leaders use the phrase, "The Kingdom of God" to manipulate people.  They often claim that what the cult is doing is for the Kingdom.

When someone questions a leader's doctrine or directives, or they indicate a desire or plan to leave, the leader's response often points towards the questioner "leaving the Kingdom!"  This is nothing more a fear tactic of destructive, high-control groups to manipulate followers into remaining in the cult, so they can be exploited.  These cult leaders crave control, and many of the cults active today seek control, not just religiously, but economically and politically as well.

Obviously, these people are misusing the Kingdom of God for their own gain.  They do this because they misunderstand the Kingdom.

The best definition of a kingdom I have ever come across is this: a kingdom is a realm where the king's will is law.

So, since then, unless I forget for a while, whenever I read or hear someone mention the Kingdom, I think of the will of God.

Of course, the will of man presented under the guise of the Kingdom is not the will of God.

How can we know what our King's will is?

First, we have the Bible.  The Bible is God's written Word.  His Word expresses His will, just as your word expresses your will, unless you are lying.  God doesn't lie.  Ever.

But His Word does contain the lies of men and Satan, so we can see what those are.

Knowing the Will of God is not just a matter of reading the Bible.  Romans 12: 2 says we are to have our minds renewed so we "may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect." NASB95

We must let the Bible change us as we read it.  My first pastor, a Baptist, once said, "It doesn't matter how many times you have been through the Bible; what matters is how much the Bible has been through you."  As you read, let the Bible speak to you about your thoughts, attitudes, actions, patterns of behavior, but also see what it says about who you are and who God is.

I also recommend a practice called assimilating the Word.  You pick a book in the Bible and read it 10, 20, 30, times or more before moving on to another book.  This allows you to see the entire context of a verse that you probably have never heard quoted in context before.  Not only that, you will start to see that one context will be nested within larger context, and that whole book itself is a context that fits into the entire context of the Bible.

We have one other way to find God's will - prayer.  Fortunately, we all have access to our King!  Hebrews 4, James 1: 5 - 8.

DOOMSDAY URGENCY OF CULTS

A common feature of many of the abusive and dangerous cults is a belief in some sort of doomsday event or period.  The leaders of these cults use these beliefs to create a sense of urgency in their followers, to pressure them to prepare for the event.  This added artificial pressure often leads to stress, and can also produce depression based on a sense of failure to meet expectations.  Sometimes a cult will destroy itself, sometimes the leader engages in abusive behavior, and sometimes the abusive and destructive behavior gets directed outward.

Here is a list of doomsday teachers that founded groups or movements that are known to have become abusive or destructive:

Joseph Smith - Latter Day Saints (Mormons)

Ellen G. White - Seventh Day Adventist

Charles Taze Russell - Jehovah Witnesses

John Alexander Dowie - Divine Healing

Charles Fox Parham - Pentecostalism

Roy E. Davis - Ku Klux Klan

Wesley Swift - Christian Identity

William Branham - Latter Rain Healing Revivals

Jim Jones - People's Temple

David Koresh - Branch Davidians, offshoot of SDA

Marshall Applewhite - Heaven's Gate

This is not a complete list.  It does not include all the offshoots of the more widespread groups, smaller groups that affected only a handful of people, and groups outside the US.

Now, major faiths such as Christianity, Judaism, and Islam do have doomsday-like beliefs, but the major emphasis of those faiths in not on the apocalyptic doctrines.  If you belong to a group that focuses on end-times, destruction, plagues, catastrophes, and such, look for other signs that it might be a cult.

COLOSSAE AND GNOSTICISM

Paul had never been to Colssae, so why did he write a letter to the disciples there?  From his comments at the end of the letter, several people who were with him when he wrote it very likely knew the Colossians, as well as the disciples at Laodecia and Heirapolis.  Apparently, they must have told Paul something that caused him to write.

The Colossian Heresy

A doctrine had spread through the assembly that Paul saw as dangerous to the faith of the disciples.  For years, scholars thought it was Gnosticism, but it didn't have all the essential elements of Gnosticism, so they now call it the  Colossian Heresy.

To sum up the Colossian Heresy, it was the belief that one could grow closer to God by learning the secret knowledge of the spiritual world contained in the teachings of religious leaders other than Jesus.

In this heresy, they saw that between God and man there existed beings that emanated from God, and the role of these beings was to help us learn this secret knowledge.  Those beings included lesser gods, angels, and other spirits.  Some of these emanations took on human form, and these included prophets, gurus, and other mystics.

I think you can already see one red flag right there.  This heresy says that Jesus is not enough, that we can elevate ourselves by adding on to Jesus.

This approach further diminishes Jesus by saying that He was one of those emanations that took on human form, He never had a flesh and blood body, He only appeared to be born, grow up, die, and resurrect.

Also, this heresy spoke about the "fullness," that is, all the emanations and all the mysteries (hidden knowledge), and having the fullness leads to oneness with God.  Paul knew he needed to answer this right away.  He does so in the first two chapters.  Notice how often he uses the word or the concept of fullness, and he refers to the body and blood of Jesus.

How did this start, and how did it become Gnosticism?

Okay, here we have to go way back in the history of Colossae to see how geography contributed to the development of the heresy.

Colossae sits in the Meander River valley, along one of the major east-west trade routes between Asia and Europe.  At one time, it was a major stop on that route because of the cold springs located there.  By the birth of Christ, the trade route shifted to nearby Laodicea.  But Colossae did not shrink too much from the loss of traffic.  It became a resort city instead.  People went there for recreational and remedial reasons.

As people travel, they not only carry with them luggage, they carry their religions, beliefs, and ideas.  People from the Far East and Europe spending time at Colossae would discuss those beliefs and ideas with each other. Some would go away with blended beliefs.  I'm sure the locals joined in on those discussions and so they too combined beliefs.

The Colossians took the framework of the Greek mystery religions, and combined them with Eastern mystic beliefs to create the Colossian Heresy.

By the early Second Century, the heresy was refined into Gnosticism.

One of the major differences between Gnosticism and the Colossian Heresy is the addition of the Demiurge.  The Demiurge was an evil and lesser god who created the world, and was the god of the Old Testament.   Neither Jesus or Ultimate Supreme Transcendent God were the creator, for the Gnostics saw them as spirit and good, and therefore unable or unlikely to create evil matter.

Today we see Gnostic influences in the New Thought and New Age movements, and in Spiritualism and some Pentecostal and Charismatic cults.

I am not going to do a complete exposé of Gnostic doctrine and influences here, but I will recommend a deeper study of Colossians plus the Gospel and letters of John, and a closer examination of your beliefs.

JOHN ALEXANDER DOWIE - THE CORNERSTONE OF CULTS

You might not have heard of John Alexander Dowie, but you have probably seen his influence in operation in many modern cults.  This article is not going to rehash his history, but analyse his behavior and his personality.  Most of this is based on a book: Militant Christian Extremism: A Critical Examination of John Alexander Dowie, by John Andrew Collins.

For those who don't know much about Dowie, I will summarize his history.

He was born in Scotland in the middle of the 19th century.  His family moved to Australia when he was in his preteens.  In his late teens, he did return to Scotland for Bible studies.  Back in Australia, he became a Congregational minister, and pastored a few churches.  He split with that organization, and became totally antidenominational.  He also began preaching a "Gospel of Divine Healing."

As a faith healer, he gained more fame and influence.  But pressure from the press and local government officials led him to come to America.

First, he settled in Los Angeles.  The newspapers supported him, until they received reports about his behavior in Australia.  He soon moved up to San Francisco, where the same process repeated itself.

He arrived in Chicago just as the city was beginning to prepare for a World's Fair.  He set up a tent right beside the entrance to the fair as an easy way to pull in new followers, and money.

Conflicts with the press and city leaders caused him to move again, but this time he didn't go far.  He established the Chicago suburb of Zion, sandwiched between Waukegan and Wisconsin.  He was ousted from ministry, but stayed in Zion until his death in 1906.

Several well known leaders in early Pentecostal circles came from Dowie's commune:  Charles Fox Parham, F. F. Bosworth, John G. Lake, and Gordon Lindsay.  Bosworth and Lindsay were close associates of William Branham.

My analysis of Dowie is that he was a narcissist.  Narcissists always want to be the center of attention, they are always right, they are never to be blamed even when they are caught doing wrong.

I don't think he was born a narcissist, but I can see how he might have become one.

His exposure to ministry began in Scotland during his childhood.  Dowie wrote tracts and gave speeches for the Temperance Movement.  I'm sure the attention he received then boosted his confidence, and his ego.

He probably worked with the Salvation Army then because they were a major part of that movement.  Later, in Australia, he led several Salvation Army style marches.  When Dowie was criticized for the noisy spectacles, he publicly condemned the bar owners, the press, and even other ministers who didn't like his tactics.

Dowie seemed to have an appetite for controversy as a way to draw attention to himself.  He would often attack Spiritualists, Catholics, denominations and their ministers before they would say anything about him.  He even criticized a popular Civil War hero upon the man's death.  After he started his healing ministry, he added doctors, nurses, and government health officials to his list of targets.

Sadly, Dowie criticized his victims.  Many people with serious medical conditions came to him for healing, but no one could confirm any healings happening under his ministry.  He opened up healing homes, where people would pay good money to stay in order to receive healing.  But many were carried out the back under cover of darkness to be taken to funeral homes.  People who came to his services and didn't get healed, he would accuse them of not having enough faith.  Towards the end, he claimed that some were not worthy of healing!

One other thing I need to cover about Dowie - his financial abuse.  He would take up multiple collections during a service.  He would neglect or refuse to pay suppliers or contractors.  He built his commune by buying up land, then lease lots to his followers, or if they wanted to buy the lot, they could borrow money from the bank he owned.  He left behind a huge fortune. I believe the gathering of wealth also fed his ego.  He sometimes bragged about his business skills.

Well, I hope you can see how many cult leaders, false teachers, false prophets, false apostles, and false messiahs, etc. operate and fit this pattern.  Chances are, Dowie wasn't the first preacher to work this way, and he definitely wasn't the last, either!  But, I believe that preachers who followed Dowie copied his pattern, and it spread through various movements and revivals.

If you want to read John Collins' book, or just to find out more about Dowie, check John's website:  William Branham Historical Research