01.02. Context - Culture, Practices and Beliefs

Context - Culture, Practices and Beliefs by Clint Branham clint@AwakenedChurch.com http://AwakenedChurch.com When we read the New Testament - modern fundamentalist evangelical Christians don’t have a clue as to what the context of the writings are. We view ALL of the scriptures thru our 21^st century gentile-Christian world filter. Most if not all of the writings are deeply engrained in Jewish culture and beliefs, and couple that with the fact that God’s word never contradicts itself. It is difficult, if not impossible; to understand what was written without understanding the circumstances, religious teachings, common practices and customs. Our “World View Filter” affects everything that we do, and perceive. Here are 2 examples:

Oriental World View: “Among the Chinese, slurping and belching at the table is acceptable, as these gestures are perceived as signs that one is appreciating the meal.”

Western World View: “People should see you eat, not hear you eat. This means that slurping, smacking guzzling, sucking the teeth and belching are good examples of bad manners.” So, if we were at a banquet that was served in Hong Kong and the guests “could be heard slurping and belching” we would view this as rude, crude and socially unacceptable. Since we refrained from slurping and belching, they would view us as un-appreciative and rude. This silly little example shows the huge difference, opposite in fact, between 2 modern day cultures. How can we fool ourselves into thinking that because the King James Bible says so, in plain English, that we can truly know the meaning without understanding the culture, practices and beliefs?

Here is a scriptural example that is often used to justify divorce.

Matthew 19:3-9 KJV The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Well that seems straightforward enough, if the spouse commits fornication, other passages – adultery, then divorce is acceptable, and the offended spouse is free to re-marry. But, there is quite a bit of difference between fornication – (intercourse of unmarried persons) and adultery (intercourse with the spouse of another). How could fornication and adultery be used interchangeable? How can there be a circumstance that divorce is alright even though God hates divorce?

Malachi 2:16 KJV For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously. The answer to that apparent conundrum is to understand the culture and practices.

Let’s look at part of the Jewish marriage:

“Betrothal (kiddushin, or erusin) was a much more formal concept in Jewish antiquity than our modern state of engagement. A betrothed couple was, for all legal purposes, considered to be married. For example, men who were betrothed, even if not actually married, were subject to the one year exemption from military service (Deuteronomy 21:7). The only respect in which this was not true was sexual---consummation of the marriage before the actual nuptials was forbidden.” So now that we better understand the Jewish marriage ceremony - both fornication and adultery would make sense. Fornication – the marriage had never been consummated, Adultery – they were legally married. Since husband and wife had never been joined together, the husband would be free to marry another. Also adultery was a crime and the adulterer would have been tried and sentenced according to Jewish law. Technically the spouse of an adulterer would have been free to remarry, since the adulterer would have been put to death by stoning. This special circumstance used to try and entrap Jesus still aligns with the fact that God hates divorce, and the Bible doesn’t contradict itself and say that; “Divorce is OK if Adultery was committed”. How many “foundational” scriptures are there that we have misinterpreted for lack of understanding? Let’s look at the scripture that is used to say that animals/foods are clean.

Acts 10:11-16 KJV And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven. That is straight forward enough, isn’t it?

Let’s look at a cultural fact: unclean animals weren’t forbidden food, they couldn’t be considered food. Telling Peter to eat a pork chop or shrimp would be similar to telling us to chow-down on roach and slug stew. No-way, no-how would we ever even consider eating that - no matter how hungry we were. It just isn’t food.

Peter happened to have the vision while he was hungry, back up a verse and look at Acts 10:10 “And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,” When Peter fell into the trance and saw the vision he wasn’t a little hungry, he was very hungry. What did he say when he woke up? Not: get me some shrimp, a pork chop, ham and some bacon.

Acts 10:17 KJV Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon’s house, and stood before the gate,

Again, Peter was hungry, very hungry; doesn’t it seem strange that the modern church’s interpretation of that passage is all animals/food are now clean? Acts 10:17 “…Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean,” then a few verses later the answer to the vision is revealed:

Acts 10:28-29 KJV And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?

Let’s recap:

1.    Peter was very hungry.

2.    He had a vision of unclean animals, he was told to kill and eat, 3 times.

3.    Peter never ate any unclean animal, not before, not during or after the vision.

4.    Peter wasn’t sure what the vision could mean, and was perplexed by it.

5.Peter says that the vision was about the Gentiles and they could receive the Gospel. From this scripture what does the modern church teach: all animals/foods are now clean! Why? That is what our ancestors and bible commentaries have taught. But that is not what God’s word actually says.

2 Peter 3:15-17 KJV And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

We have been taught by teachers that are spoken of in 2 Peter 3:16 “they that are unlearned and unstable”. And what have we believed? An interpretation of God’s word that is twisted, twisted unto OUR destruction.

Matthew 7:22-23 KJV Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

What will you do? What is common and comfortable? Or what God’s Word commands.

2 Chronicles 7:14 KJV If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.