Best Photos of 2025

Well, this is photography blog, as well as other things. And I have been a bit absent minded when it comes to posting. So here are my favorite photos of 2025. Happy New Year.

We took Joey down to Galveston for New Year’s.

Kitchen Sunrise.

Celebrating our 10th Wedding Anniversary in Memphis, with some friends.

North Fork Holston River — Virginia.

Our granddaughter.

Our sleepy grandson.

Celebrating my 64th birthday at Tricky Fish in Fort Worth.

The LAST pair of Birthday Tecovas we will ever buy. See my previous post. AS a follow up, I did get my first pair resoled and the man who did it said I should buy Lucchesse next time.

Joey’s 18th birthday!

Joey’s graduation. I’m proud of him.

Our first visit to downtown Knoxville, with the rain shower option.

We found a quaint loft in downtown Knoxville.

Completely relaxed.

Picked up the boys for a drive over to Rockwall for some burgers and ice cream

One of the perks of my job: field trips to the petting zoo at the fair.

The absolute best breakfast of the year!

Ducking out of the wind, trying to enjoy the beach.

The best part of Galveston.

The best sunrise of 2025.

The best gift of Christmas.

Heidi and I found a great barbecue restaurant in Lebanon, TN. It was our last meal together before I flew back to Texas, in order to preach last Sunday. Alas, I was too sick to preach and slept all day. Heidi stayed in Tennessee with our daughter and grand children. We all ended the year under the weather.

All photos are copyright © Timothy J. Hammons 2025. 

Tecovas — Not Your Granddads Boots, or Shoes, or Anything Else That Lasted Longer Than a Common Cold.

My father told the story about how his father, my granddad, went into a Sears and Roebuck store with a pair of dress shoes that he had worn for 10 years. The shoes had a hole in the sole, and were beat up. He handed the shoes to the clerk in charge of the shoe department and said, “what are you going to do about these shoes?”

This was a time when the shoe clerk new my grandfather’s name. He responded, “Mr. Hammons, let me speak with my manager.” The clerk took the shoes back, spoke with his manager and came out and said, “Mr. Hammons, we’re sorry for the condition of these shoes. The manager has instructed me to give you a new pair.”

The clerk then went to the back room and brought out an identical pair of shoes, brand new, and gave them to my grandfather, who wore those for another 10 years.

I was hoping that when I went to buy a pair of Tecova boots, that I was getting the same quality. I believed their advertising. They gave me the impression that the fact that they were hand crafted, that one would be forever wearing the same pair. It was truly flashy commercialism.

The problem is, that I’m not an expert on boots. I outgrew my last pair of cowboy boots back in the early 1970s, when my mom would take me and my brothers out to the Round Up Rodeo in Simonton, Texas. Let’s face it, I’m a city boy. Our trips to the Round Up made it abundantly clear that I wasn’t a cowboy.

It’s not that I can’t ride a horse. I can. It’s not that I cannot saddle a horse. I can do that too. But the life of a cowboy, the title of the cowboy deserves more honor and respect than simply putting on a pair of boots and a Stetson. Not that there is anything wrong with wearing boots and a Stetson.

But let’s not kid ourselves. There are only a few men in the world who qualify as cowboys, and I ain’t one of them.

In buying a pair of cowboy boots, I was not trying to proclaim myself as a cowboy. I really, just wanted a footwear that was comfortable and would last longer than a pair of $350 Nike Air Jordans. The Tecovas I bought didn’t. But that isn’t entirely true. They did, and will last for many more years, but not without being resoled.

This is where the shock came home to roost. I imagined that I would have the boots resoled. But not after 2 and half years. I figured … 10 years should be expected? If my grandfather’s wingtips from Sears & Roebucks, which he did wear every day, could last 10 years, then certainly my handcrafted Tecovas would last that long, especially since I didn’t wear them every day.

But they didn’t.

Last week, I was looking at them more closely than normal and noted that the tips were worn off. Further more, the leather soles were splitting apart.

This was the opportunity to see if Tecova really supported their product. I planned to say the exact words that my grandfather used. It was a test. I was testing the company. They were so sure of their product that they not only boasted about them, they offered customers drinks of their choice while they sold their products. Yes, you could have a whiskey while trying on their boots. The first red flag: they didn’t have any Scotch to offer. As one obscure man once said, “American whiskey is nothing more than a hillbilly’s attempt at Scotch.”

But I digress.

I showed the woman in the store the boots. See the picture above. I asked her, what she was going to do about them? She told me, she would speak to her manager and went in the back. After 20 minutes or so, she came back and said that since they were so old, 2 1/2 years, they could not replace them. They could send them off to be resoled for $150, or give me a 20% discount on a pair of new boots.

This last offer was an absolute joke. They had been offering anybody and everybody 20% off for the past three weeks for the Black Friday sale. I let her know, politely, how disappointed I was in the company and made sure she knew that I was a repeat customer. I was wearing my second pair of Tecovas.

I took my boots and left.

In hindsight, my mistake was being enamored with all the claims made in their advertising, and all the flash in the store. They have all these young women selling their boots. They offer wine, whiskey, water, and soda for anyone who is thirsty. The smell of leather permeates. It’s a flashy place.

But when you think about it, Tecova hasn’t been around that long. There are only a few country songs with Tecovas mentioned in the lyrics, both in the past three years. Nothing like Lucchese which is mentioned in Amarillo By Morning (1982), George Strait, and in Much Too Young (1989), by Garth Brooks. Justin Boots, Ariat, and Tony Lama all have a much greater testimony to durability than Tecova.

This is all according to Grok. And yes, I told Grok about this, and asked which boots are better than Tecova. Those were the four he mentioned, and noted that the problem I was having with the Tecovas is a common problem with Tecovas. I guess this city boy should have asked Grok before shelling out a couple of hundred dollars on a pair of boots. Better yet, I should have listened to George Strait and his song, Amarillo By Morning more closely. Out of all the songs Grok listed, that was the only one I knew. But I have heard of Garth Brooks, and he suggested the same thing.

I should have asked my cowboy and rodeo acquaintances. But, like a city boy, I was enamored with exactly the things a city boy would be enamored with, and that is why Tecova is in business.

Before you buy a pair boots, have a listen to George or Garth Brooks.

Here is Grok’s comparison between Tecovas and other brands:

Brand
Why Better Than Tecovas
Key Model Suggestion
Price Range
Notable Features
Lucchese
Exceptional build quality with all-leather construction (no synthetics or fillers), steel shanks for stability, and a lifetime of heirloom potential—many owners report 10+ years before needing a resole. Superior customer service includes custom fittings and a robust warranty/repair program.
Madison (12″ shaft, calfskin leather, leather sole)
$450–$600
Handcrafted in Texas; molds to your foot like a glove; free 30-day returns and easy resoling at authorized cobblers.
Justin Boots
Over 140 years of reliability, with thicker leathers and welted soles that outlast Tecovas in wet/dry conditions. Their J-Flex system adds arch support for all-day comfort, and they offer a strong satisfaction guarantee with hassle-free exchanges.
Roper II (11″ shaft, full-grain cowhide, rubber-capped leather sole)
$200–$350
Affordable durability; wide size range (including EE widths); made in the USA with a focus on ranch-ready toughness.
Ariat
Modern engineering meets Western tradition—ATS tech for torque stability and cushioned insoles prevents fatigue, while waterproof/durable outsoles handle abuse better than pure leather. Excellent support with 90-day returns and a repair network.
Heritage Stockman (12″ shaft, premium full-grain leather, Duratread rubber sole option)
$250–$400
Breathable yet rugged; great for mixed use (office to outdoors); consistently high marks for longevity in 2025 reviews.
Tony Lama
Time-tested craftsmanship with genuine lemonwood pegs and brass nails for secure sole attachment, avoiding Tecovas’ reported glue issues. Boots are resole-friendly and backed by a solid warranty; users praise the even break-in and lasting shape.
Stallion (12″ shaft, smooth leather, leather sole with rubber heel)
$300–$450
Authentic Texas heritage; exotic skin options if you want variety; strong community endorsement for value over hype.

 

 

One Mediator

Over the past several weeks, the verse found in 1 Timothy 2:5 has really hit me at a deeper level all over again. I don’t know if this ever happens to you, but it does happen to me. It’s usually with a verse I have spent some time with, and I understood the meaning of the verse in my original passing. What changes is the implications of the verse after I’ve understood the meaning. Here is the verse:

5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

I’ve always understood the verse, in context, for what it was saying: that on the cross, Jesus was our Mediator. Verse 6 goes on to read: who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. So it is properly understood as, Christ is the one who intervenes between two parties who are at odds: namely, God and mankind, in His death on the cross.

Jesus gave Himself as a sacrifice in order to reconcile us to God. This holy sacrifice by Christ was the penultimate act of mediation on behalf of those who are saved.

But what hit me, is tied up in the implication of there being only “one Mediator.” There is only One Mediator. The implication of what hit me is that Jesus, as the Second Person of the Trinity, has always been, the only Mediator between God and Man. We should not understand His office as Mediator as something that He only took on in His earthly ministry, since mankind has always needed a mediator since the fall. This means the even at the fall of man, the same Mediator who died on the cross, was the same Mediator who said: “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you that you not eat?”

And even in that, we see that the same Mediator was the One who gave the command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Old Testament Implications

Where this really helps us out, is that we see the role of the Second Person of the Trinity in the Old Covenant. When YHWH tells Noah to build an ark, Christ was speaking. When YHWH tells Abram to leave UR, it was Christ telling him. When He makes a covenant with Abram, it was Christ making the covenant. When He meets with Abram along with two angels, it is Christ who met with Him. When Jacob wrestled with YHWH, he wrestled with Christ.

When YHWH tells Moses from the burning bush, “I Am who I AM,” it Christ who spoke the words (as He clarifies to us in John 8). When He leads them through the Red Sea by a pillar of cloud during the day, and fire at night, it was Christ.

The neat thing about this is that it begins to develop our understanding of how Christ relates to the Old Testament. We all know of His words to the disciples on the road to Emmaus, “O foolish ones, and slow to heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!… And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.”

We read these words but are at a loss what Jesus said. Yet, when we understand that He was the Mediator all throughout the Old Covenant period, we begin to see how it was that the Scriptures were all about Him. We see His actions, hear His words, and know that it was Christ who said them.

We also get a glimpse of this reality in one of the few references to the Father. In Psalm 110: 1, it reads, The LORD said to my Lord, “Sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”

King David could write “My Lord,” because he knew the Second Person of the Trinity. The Mediator had spoken to him, revealed truth to him, and guided David in life. So the concept of knowing and hearing the Mediator was not beyond David. He knew and was known by the Mediator.

The new revelation for David was hearing the Father say to the Son, “Sit at My right hand…”

There is a lot more to the realization of what it means that Christ is the One Mediator between God and man. Hopefully, you will start to see the implications for yourself as you read through Scripture.

Nick Fuentes vs. William L. Shirer

When I wrote the two blog posts on the post-war consensus, World War II and Hitler, and Hitler, True Evil, and the Post-War Consensus, I didn’t realize that I was laying the groundwork for this post. This is because I had yet to be introduced to the reason for those two post: Nick Fuentes. I confess, I was ignorant of who he was. I was simply responding to those who were making arguments that Fuentes has put forth, and trying to put them into perspective.

I was beside myself as to why anyone in this day and age would argue that the number of those Jews killed in the holocaust was nowhere near 6 million.

Then Nick Fuentes was featured on Tucker Carlson, and I watched it. Fuentes seemed… decent and well-spoken. But something wasn’t right.

If I’ve learned anything about human nature in my 60+ years in life, anyone can present themselves in a good light when they really put their minds to it. And this is what Fuentes did on Tucker Carlson. He sought to build a case that he was a victim after The Daily Wire sent him packing for his views on Israel. The piece was given in a way that was meant to make us feel sorry for Fuentes simply because he was “just asking questions.”

In a lawsuit the first to speak seems right,
until someone comes forward and cross-examines. Proverbs 18:17

And of course, others have examined Fuentes, and continue to do so.  Ben Shapiro really brought the receipts against Fuentes. I’m not a huge fan of Shapiro, but I don’t discount what he says at times. After watching what he said, this is one of those times. And if you don’t like what Shapiro says, how about Doug Wilson? He doesn’t give Fuentes a good report either.

If you reread the previous section, you will see and understand why I believe that there is no way for Fuentes to display openly and publicly the kind of demented attitudes toward sex and women the way that he does without having multiple black mold closets in his life, filled with the rotting debris of gangrenous lusts. The portrayals of gay porn that he has accidentally broadcast in the past provide just a glimpse of what is obviously going on. He has offered various explanations, of course—of the “aliens kidnapped me, what year is it?” variety—and anyone who accepts such explanations at face value might be the very chumpiest of chumps. Nick Fuentes is bad news, and one very lost puppy.

Read the rest of the article here.

But for my purposes, watch the video that Shapiro put forth. It’s only 5 minutes long.

Shapiro On Fuentes

Hopefully you see that Fuentes condemns himself in a lot of areas in that clip. He is atrocious. What I want to comment on, what I feel like I have some knowledge of, are his comments about Hitler and the holocaust. What he says, shows he knows nothing of Adolf Hitler, the Third Reich, the Nazis, or the holocaust. He is just spouting absolute ignorance to all of it. What does he say? (It begins at minute 3:14 if you want to skip to that part).

  • “Buddy, it’s Führer Friday. It is Hitler Friday. Shut up. It is Heil Hitler Friday, n*gga. Heil Hitler. All my n*ggas [are] Nazis. Hitler was a pedophile? Kind of. It’s like, well, he was also really f***ing cool. So, you know, time to grow up. We’re not children anymore, am I right, boys? Let’s go. He…”
  • “It takes one hour to cook a batch of cookies (Jews), and you have 15 ovens, probably in four different kitchens, right? Doing 24 hours a day, every day for five years, how long would it take you to make six million? Hmm, I don’t know, it certainly wouldn’t be five years, right, the math doesn’t seem to add up there.”

And for some reason, he has a following. That following really is ignorant of history and the facts of the holocaust. But more on that in a moment.

Really F***ing Cool

Let’s start with the first statement. Sorry for the f-bomb, but I think we need to quote this man in context and say what he says. He thinks Hitler is “really f***ing cool.”

Instead of giving my opinion, let me quote from William L. Shire, who wrote the book, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.

“The man who founded the Third Reich, who ruled it ruthlessly and often with uncommon shrewdness, who led it to such dizzy heights and to such a sorry end, was a person of undoubted, if evil, genius.”

The one who follows Fuentes will focus on the word “genius” and completely miss the word “evil.” Let’s not make that mistake. Hitler was truly evil (however, he is not the ultimate of evil or the definition of evil. His evilness, in the grand scale, is actually quite normal evil and what is in the heart of every man, apart from the Spirit and grace of God.)

I think Shirer is a good person to turn to on the issue of Hitler. He lived in Germany before the war, and was a reporter there. He spoke German. He knew Germany. He knew the people. He heard Hitler’s speeches in person. Not things reported to him. He heard them and reported them to the world. He knew Hitler’s voice. He knew Hitler’s intention, and he knew Hitler’s intentions because he was one of the first historians to gain access on all of the Nazi documents and writings after the war. He was not only writing from personal experience, eyewitness testimony, but also the words of Hitler himself. He was documenting what they were intending to do. There was no speculation on the part of Shirer in writing his book. He was working with the facts of what the Nazis wrote themselves.

Knowing this, nukes the entire idea of the post-war consensus, since there as no consensus when Shirer wrote his book. In fact, he was criticized for writing and releasing his book so soon after the War ended. Perhaps this criticism comes about because he was not in consensus with anyone. The consensus had not had time to be formed, and he was defeating the purpose of those who were working to form a consensus. But this is just speculation. Please don’t put too much stock in that.

I point all this out, so we understand, that Shirer was an eyewitness to the things that happened in Germany before and after the war, and was in contact with many Germans during the war. He had to leave in 1940, but was back and in contact with many during the war.

We could say, that of the two men, Shirer was actually an expert on Hitler, whereas Fuentes? He has a podcast that he operates from his parents’ basement. Has Fuentes ever been to Germany? I doubt it. In his comments to Tucker, he was offered a free trip to Israel, and he refused to go, under the guise of “America First.” This doesn’t give him much credibility.

Yet, he admires Hitler, like some starry-eyed groupie.

Shirer never looks upon Hitler with any admiration at all. He called him a “madman,” after Hitler gave a speech. He said he was “evil, genius,” as I mentioned above. Shirer didn’t just call him a madman. He spent some 1,000 pages showing what a madman Hitler was. He recounted how his evilness played out on the German people, and the Jews, and the Poles, and the Czechs, and anyone else who stood in his way. And yes, that included Christians as well, especially the pastors who spoke out against him.

Was Hitler cool? Not in the least. There really was nothing likable about Adolf Hitler. Even those close to him, feared him, because he was so unstable. But cool?

Only a fool sitting in his mother’s basement in 21st century America, far removed from the ghettos, and trenches filled with Jewish bodies, would say something so stupid.

And for some reason, people think Fuentes is worthy of attention.

Now Fuentes’ speculation about 6 million Jews being destroyed like cookies is even more egregious than the stupidity of “Hitler is f***ing cool.” Why? Because Fuentes

trivializes what took place in the ovens in the concentration camps by calling Jews “cookies.” He doesn’t have the decency to call them human beings. He ignores that those bearing God’s image were being ruthlessly murdered, torched, and gassed. He gets cutesy over their deaths by using the metaphor “cookies.”

And he thinks he is something else by asking the “deep” questions: How could 6 million Jews actually be killed in a five year period in the ovens alone?

The problem with this genius observation of his is that no one was saying that 6 million were gassed. The six million Jews killed were killed during the Holocaust, of which, many died in the concentration camps. But the Holocaust didn’t just occur in the concentration camps. It occurred in the ghettos, in the streets, throughout the country side.

Shirer gives this account from an eyewitness of those who were line up and executed for being Jews:

“Without screaming or weeping these people undressed, stood around in family groups, kissed each other, said farewells and waited for a sign from another S.S. man, who stood near the pit, also with a whip in his hand. During the fifteen minutes that I stood near the pit I heard no complaint or plea for mercy… An old woman with snow-white hair was holding a one-year-old child in her arms and singing to it and tickling it. The child was cooing with delight. The parents were looking on with tears in their eyes. The father was holding the hand of a boy about 10 years old and speaking to him softly; the boy was fighting his tears. The father pointed to the sky, stroked his head and seemed to explain something to him.
At that moment the S.S. man at the pit shouted something to his comrade. The latter counted off about twenty persons and instructed them to go behind the earth mound… I well remember a girl, slim and with black hair, who, as she passed close to me, pointed to herself and said: “twenty-three years old.” I walked around the mound and found myself confronted by a tremendous grave. People were closely wedged together and lying on top of each other so that only their heads were visible. Nearly all had blood running over their shoulders from their heads. Some of the people were still moving. Some were lifting their arms and turning their heads to show that they were still alive. The pit was already two-thirds full. I estimated that it contained about a thousand people. I looked for the man who did the shooting. He was an S.S. man, who sat at the edge of the narrow end of the pit, his feet dangling into the pit. He had a tommy gun on his knees and was smoking a cigarette.
The people, completely naked, went down some steps and clambered over the heads of the people lying there to the place to which the S.S. man directed them. They lay down in front of the dead or wounded people; some caressed those who were still alive and spoke to them in a low voice. Then I heard a series of shots. I looked into the pit and saw that the bodies were twitching or the heads lying already motionless on top of the bodies that lay beneath them. Blood was running from their necks. The next batch was approaching already. They went down into the pit, lined themselves up against the previous victims and were shot. And so it went, batch after batch. The next morning the German engineer returned to the site. I saw about thirty naked people lying near the pit. Some of them were still alive… Later the Jews still alive were ordered to throw the corpses into the pit. Then they themselves had to lie down in this to be shot in the neck… I swear before God that this is the absolute truth.” (The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich).

This is the results of Hitler’s leadership, and seeking the “final solution.” I know the followers of Fuentes might not know what the final solution was, so let’s look as the results of a quick search from Grok.

The “Final Solution” (often referred to as the “Final Solution to the Jewish Question”) was a euphemism used by Nazi Germany during World War II to describe their systematic plan for the genocide of Europe’s Jewish population. Implemented primarily from 1941 to 1945 under the Third Reich, it involved mass deportations, forced labor, and extermination through methods such as ghettos, mobile killing units, and concentration/death camps like Auschwitz, resulting in the murder of approximately six million Jews. This policy evolved from earlier anti-Semitic measures and escalated following the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941.

So what we have at this point, is a real historian, Shirer, vs. Fuentes, a bean-bag quarterback, commenting or speaking of the death of six million Jews in the holocaust. Shirer gives actual evidence. Fuentes just gives speculation. Idle speculation. He does not back his claim up with any evidence whatsoever. He just specualates.

Anyone can speculate. Anyone can ask unanswerable questions. Satan did that in the Garden of Eden. To ask speculative questions, in order to bring doubt and misunderstanding, is more of Satan than it is of Christ. This is what men like Fuentes do. They ask lots of questions. Unbelieving critics of Christ have been doing it for 2,000 years.

What is sad is that so many in the church are given over to the fleshly speculations of men like Fuentes. He is not interested in the truth. He is merely interested in his idle gossip so he can build his base. If we are truly in Christ, we shouldn’t give him a moment’s notice since Christ is the Truth. We should be those who seek the Truth, in Christ, and in the world He has given us, and refute those idle babbling basement dwellers.

I am glad I watched the Tucker Carlson interview. And that I’ve done a dive into who Fuentes is. We don’t need him in conservative circles, or in the church, without repentance on his side. He is a vile man and if we listen to him, the way he wants us to listen to him, he will end up becoming “really f***ing cool” just like his hero.

Hitler, True Evil, and Post-War Consensus

I admit that I struggled with the idea of post-war consensus. When I first heard the term, I was baffled.

Fortunately, Doug Wilson connected the dots for me. Post-war consensus is the idea that we need to proceed in society, after World War II, without any absolute beliefs. Those who put this forth, did so with the idea that it was hard-core beliefs that got us into the mess of World War I and World War II.

In moving away from this mistake, as they saw it, they made a play for the definition of true evil. Instead of looking to Scripture for that definition, they looked to Hitler. They set Adolf up as the standard for the greatest of all evil beings. This was, to warp what God’s word had said about that which is most evil. For Christians, the heart of unbelief in God, and His word, is the height of all evil. Not Hitler. Not Polpot. Not even Donald Trump, or even Douglas Wilson (for those of you who suffer from Wilson Derangement Syndrome). It is simply unbelief in God’s word.

12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; 13 but exhort one another daily, while it is called “Today,” lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. Hebrews 3:12-13.

True evil is the simple heart of unbelief. While we can look to Hitler as the embodiment of unchecked evil, then we can fool ourselves into thinking we are not that evil, so we must be pretty good. But Hitler, while evil, is not the standard of evil. Unbelief is the standard.

I admit, that I bought into their definition for a number of years. It wasn’t until I was preaching through the book of Hebrews that I realized my mistake and repented from thinking error. Hitler was evil. But so is the sweet little old lady who sits in the pews, week after week, with a heart of unbelief.

By the way, just so I’m clear, Hitler was in no way, shape, form or fashion a Christian. He sent enough Christian pastors to the concentration camps as well as Jews. His religion was was based on himself. He was a god to himself, and the Triune God gave him, and those who followed him, over to themselves.

Wilson’s Post Here

Other thoughts on Hitler and World War II can be read here.

The Democrats Love Murder, They’ve Been Practicing it For Years

5 The boastful shall not stand in Your sight;
You hate all workers of iniquity.
6 You shall destroy those who speak falsehood;
YHWH abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man (Psalm 5)

The morning opened with more stories pouring out of North Carolina over the death of a Ukrainian woman at the hands of a ruthless murderer. The woman had been riding the train on her way home when a murderous thug cut her throat for no reason, other than the fact that he wanted to kill a “white bitch.” Those are his words, as quoted in the media.

That was hard enough.

Then as I was working on another post, my wife walked through the door and said, “Have you been on X?”

“No, why?”

“Charlie Kirk has been shot.”

Yahweh tests the righteous,
But the wicked and the one who loves violence His soul hates (Psalm 11:5)

Who is Charlie Kirk? I will let Grok answer:

Charlie Kirk is an American conservative activist, author, and media personality. He is the founder and president of Turning Point USA, a nonprofit organization that promotes conservative values on college campuses. Born on October 14, 1993, in Wheeling, Illinois, Kirk gained prominence through his advocacy for free markets, limited government, and traditional values. He is a frequent commentator on political issues, often appearing on conservative media outlets like Fox News and hosting “The Charlie Kirk Show,” a daily radio program and podcast. Kirk is known for his outspoken views on topics like immigration, education, and cultural issues, often sparking controversy with his rhetoric. He has authored several books, including The MAGA Doctrine and The College Scam. His influence is significant among young conservative audiences, amplified by his large social media following, particularly on platforms like X, where he engages with current events and political debates.

I only started listening to Kirk about 6 months ago, because I was attracted to the way he handled questions from the audience. He always respected everyone he spoke with, even though they may not have returned that respect. I also loved his ability to bring in the facts about in every situation. He didn’t argue from a feelings standpoint, as so many of those who opposed him did. And the facts for his positions were always well verified.

Today, someone shot and killed him. Since he argued from a conservative point of view, he was hated by the left. No matter how many stood before him, they could never hold their own against Charlie Kirk. Their only solution: kill him.

This is their solution for anyone who gets in their way. As Rush Limbaugh used to say, “they cannot win in the arena of ideas.” We saw this with the COVID scam. And we are seeing it now. They cannot win in the arena of ideas because they are ensconced in lies and murder. The Democratic Party has always been the party of lies and murder. It was founded on the principle of keeping blacks in their place, and used the KKK to do so. Now, it uses Black Lives Matters, and the government to keep blacks in their place.

The irony is that those in the Democrat Party are always in the habit of calling those of us on the right, like Charlie Kirk, Hitler. They love to throw that pejorative  around. Yet, while Hitler murdered his 6,000,000 Jews, they have slaughtered their 60,000,000 babies.

And that is the point. The Left is use to murder. They’ve been doing it for 150 years and those of us on the right, are not. We are led to believe that we can continue to live in our country with these murderers using civil discourse. Kind of like what Charlie Kirk did. He was the best there was. And they assassinated him.

Why?

Because it is what they do.

15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood,
16 Destruction and misery are in their paths,
17 And the path of peace they have not known” (Romans 3). 

Charlie Kirk was called home to be with our Savior today. From what I understand, those on BlueSky are rejoicing, but for all the wrong reasons.

Those of us in Christ, should rejoice, for all the right reasons. Charlie knew our Savior. He was a believer. I’m sure he heard the words: “Well done, good and faithful servant,” just a few short hours ago.

He does rest in peace. May our Savior give his wife and children the comfort that only those of us in Christ, truly know.

The Hypocrite Defined

The Hypocrite

In regards to the Covenants of God, the Old and the New, hypocrisy is demonstrated when one professes faith in God, has the signs of the covenant placed upon them, but never lives sincerely towards God. They are the ones of which Jesus said:

Matthew 15:7-9

7 You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you:

8 ‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
9 But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commands of men.’”

These are people that merely went through the motions, for the purposes of being recognized and praised by men. Yet, these three acts of piety (charity, prayer, and fasting) are never to be done for the praise of men, but for God alone. When we do them for the praise of men, we are being hypocrites. At the root of hypocrisy is pride and arrogance.

I got the following analogy from Doug Wilson:

“The hypocrites are like the man who is married. He has taken on the covenant of marriage, but only does so for the applause he can get for looking like a great husband and father, all the while, neglecting his wife. He doesn’t love her in the least, but uses her to make himself look good.

“He is indeed, married, but he is functionally unfaithful to his wife. He is a hypocrite.

“The hypocrite in our context (Matthew 6:1-18) is the one who is inside the covenant. It is the Jews under the Old Covenant that He is speaking too, but the same truths apply to those of us under the New Covenant.

“The hypocrite has the marks of the covenant. For us, that would be baptism. He is objectively inside the covenant, but he is not faithful to the covenant.

“His actions, are not directed towards God, but man, just like the married hypocrite. His actions are always focused upon himself, instead of his wife and children. So too, is the covenantal hypocrite. His actions are always focused on the praise he will receive, and not the glory and honor of our Father in heaven. He is one who is spiritually dishonest with himself, and others. Yet, God is not fooled.”

The hypocrite needs to repent and come to Christ.

(Taken from a portion of my sermon on Matthew 6:16-18 concerning fasting.)

DIY: Workbench

Since we moved into our home three years ago, I’ve wanted to build a workbench so I would have an area to work on projects. I’ve done a few since moving in August 20, 2022: painting a lot of the rooms, painting the garage, making a spice rack out of a wooden pallet, painting book shelves, sanding down and painting a hutch, and more bookshelves. But I haven’t really built anything. The workbench would be the first building project.

I watched a lot of DIY videos on YouTube about building workbenches in preparation and finally settled on the following one here. I thought that one was simple enough to give it a go.

I bought the wood in early August and started on the 6th. Here are photos of my progress with commentary.

You can see the need for a workbench already. I had to start in the driveway.

Once I had the two sides put together, I had to put together the two sides. This is where the seeds of doubt began to sprout. I thought for sure the project would be a bust. Please notice the bungee cords I was using to try and hold it together while I put in the lag bolts. I ended up buying two large clamps.

My little helper.

It started to come together.

Once I had it set up, I realized that the way it was positioned, there would be no room to work off the edge of the table. My garage isn’t wide enough being only a single-car garage. I needed to turn it against the right wall, which caused a problem keeping it level. If you will notice down in the right-hand side of the photo, the big crack in the foundation of the garage? I had to use a brick to level it out once I turned it.

Once I turned the table and leveled it, I wanted it as flush as I could get it up next to the wall.

This was after I realized I needed more 2x8s.

Notice how solid the joints are. I had a man in my church tease me saying it was over-engineered.

The final piece was the backsplash against the wall. It was an extra piece that I didn’t want to go to waste.

Looking underneath.

Declaring it done!

If you watch the video, let me know how close I came to duplicating the table. I will say that I made my table higher and deeper. Bigger is better!

All photos © Timothy J. Hammons, 2025.

 

Chip & Joanna’s Fall and How Their Pastor Played a Part

It has been said that culture flows downstream from the church. More specifically, culture flows downstream from the pulpit.

This truth can be seen in the recent dustup over television stars Chip and Joanna Gaines.

For those of you who do not know, Chip and Joanna Gaines are local and national celebrities because of the show Fixer Upper, and because of their empire known as Magnolia. I have never seen Fixer Upper, but I have been to Magnolia. The cookies are worth the high price of $4 a piece. I’ve never tried the cupcakes, but I’m told they are splendid.

The problem for Chip and Joanna has come about because of a new show they are producing called Back to the Frontier.

The New Show

The new show features three couples who pretend to go back in time, and live in the 1880s. The problem with this scenario is that it involves a sodomite couple, who are pretending to be married, and who paid a woman to bear (sell) twin boys to them. My intent here, is not in discussing the couple. You can read more about them here and here. It is much worse than it sounds.

Also, please watch CrossPolitic’s presentation on the entire ordeal here. The guys at CP not only explain what is going on, but also show how wicked the entire show is. It is not as though Chip and Joanna were just providing money to produce the show. They are actively supporting and promoting sodomite marriage. The stated goal of the sodomite couple is to normalize sodomite marriage. This shows that they know it is not normal. It’s evil. In propping up this couple, Chip and Joanna are complicit in this normalization.

Yet, I think what is even more disturbing than all this, is the role their pastor is playing (or not playing). Chip and Joanna attend the church, Antioch Waco. And here is where the real problem begins.

The Pastor Bears the Responsibility

Now you do need to know, that the pastor of Antioch Waco, Jimmy Siebert, has come out against gay marriage, and has expressed that marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a bare minimum of what should have happend. Yet, there is more. He should not have just stated the positive of what they believe, but he also should have called both Chip and Joanna (and all who hold to sodomite marriage) to repentance.

This is what a true shepherd does. He should not just state what marriage is, but for those who are under his spiritual care who are supporting sodomite marriage, he should deal with them in such a way that either leads to their repentance or their excommunication from the church.

But to say nothing… is to neglect the calling of a shepherd.

I admit, church discipline may be going on behind the scenes. Yet, at some point, it has to be public since the sin was public. You cannot ignore the fact that other sheep are watching and need to see discipline in the lives of those who publicly sin.

The greater problem in all this is the fact that the pastor undermines his own stance on marriage every time he allows a woman to preach in the pulpit.

Women in the Pulpit Undermine Marriage

Gabriel Rench shares a video clip of the pastor of Antioch Waco introducing a woman to the congregation who “has a word for us today.” I strongly recommend that you watch it.

What you are seeing is the foundational problem that the pastor has embraced, of allowing women to preach, that results in the acceptance of sodomite marriage. How so?

It is so because the pastor is tacitly approving of role reversals when he allows a woman to preach.

Now hear me out on this. We know that Paul makes it clear that women are not to teach, preach, or have authority in the church (preaching by its very nature is authoritative, so when you allow a woman to do so, you are in effect, effectively saying the roles of men and women matter not).

Here is the reason: when a lawfully ordained man stands before the congregation and declares the word of God, he does so as the representative of Christ to the congregation. He is standing in the place of Christ,  speaking to the Bride of Christ. Preaching to the congregation is in the context of a husband/wife relationship. Christ speaks to His Bride through the pastor.

I’m not saying that the pastor is the husband, but he represents the Husband, and when he preaches faithfully, the congregations hears HIM, meaning Christ. We understand this in part from Romans 10:14… How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?

Now, notice that I have placed a strikethrough on the word “of”? This is because “of” is not in the original text, meaning that when a man preaches faithfully, we hear Christ!

In describing this relationship that Christ has with His Bride, Paul tells us that Christ sanctifies His Bride with the washing of the water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish (Ephesians 5:26-27).

The main way that Christ washes His bride with the word is through the reading of the word, and the preaching of the word.

Now, notice something else about this passage in Ephesians: Paul is writing specifically about marriage, and writing to husbands. Yet, in the middle of his instruction, he shifts from earthly husbands to THE Husband, and THE Bride. This is THE Marriage that is the example to all marriages. It is THE Marriage planned before the foundations of the world.

Therefore, when Christ established the church, His plan was/is to use men to stand in His stead for Him, because the man represents Christ, the Bridegroom, as he preaches to The Bride.

Christ has already made it clear that the leaders of the church are to be men. Putting women in the role or place of a man is actually an abomination. The roles of men and women were clearly understood throughout the history of God’s people until the last 150 years.

Christ had this principle codified in the giving of the Law. (Understand that Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity. While He did not yet have His human body, He was still the Mediator between God and Man even under the Old Covenant. So the giving of the Law on Mt. Sinai, was given by the Second Person of the Trinity. It is His Law, just as much as it is the Father’s Law).

And one specific law given made it clear that men were to serve in the roles of men, and women in their roles. To cross the roles is an abomination before God.

5 “A woman shall not wear man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to Yahweh your God (Deuteronomy 22:5).

Clothing, throughout history, has indicated the role a person had. Yes, feminism has worked hard to erase this fact, but again, throughout history this truth was understood. What you wore, indicated who you were and what you did.

Therefore a woman was not to wear men’s clothing, i.e., take on the role of a man, to serve as man, to act as a man. Notice how sinful this is: for whoever does these things is an abomination to Yahweh your God.

As you can see, the reversal of roles in society is not looked on by God with pleasure. It’s the opposite. It is an abomination.

Why is this so?

Because it goes against the God-ordained order of the image of God, male and female. Men are to keep, guard, provide, and take dominion. Women are to help their husbands, and bear and nurture children. Affirming these truths does not matter if we do not live them out.  Therefore, when we violate the simple order God has given to us, it is an abomination to Him because it is a sin against HIS image. We are violating the very honor God has given to us in making us in His image.

His image is precious to Him.

And since it is precious to Him, we should treat it as precious as well, and seek to maintain the roles He has given to us, feminism be damned… and is damned.

Women in the Pulpit

Hopefully, you can see how wrong it is for a woman to preach. When a woman tries to preach, she has already proven herself unfaithful from the get go. We all know Paul’s admonition against women teaching and having authority. Feminists bend over backwards attempting to negate Paul’s statement: And I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man, but to be silence (1 Timothy 2:12).

In fact, just before that verse, Paul wrotes: Let a woman learn in silence in all submission.

So, we know the moment that a woman stands up to preach, she is already in rebellion against God.

Therefore, we don’t hear from Christ, but from her. She shares a message with us, but she doesn’t preach. And it is actually worse than that. She is turning the husband/wife relationship that Jesus has with His Bride into an abomination. She is trying to stand in the place of the husband. She, like Eve in the Garden, is attempting to wield the sword against Satan and failing miserably. Her presence in the pulpit sends confusion, not clarity. It sends a message that the created order between men and women means nothing at all.

And this IS a creational issue. When Paul defends his position, he roots the issue in creation, not culture, not Jewish understanding, but creation.

For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived fell into transgression (1 Timothy 2:13-14).

In view of all this, you can see, that even if the pastor says publicly that marriage is between a man and a woman, every time he allows a woman to preach in the pulpit, or preach anywhere, he undermines the very message he is claims to maintain. He is promoting what God’s word calls an abomination.

This is considered being correct on orthodoxy, but incorrect on orthopraxy. He is not practicing what he preaches. And he does allow women to preach.

Remember the video clip from Gabriel Rench on X  above? You can see the video of the Pastor Jimmy Siebert of Antioch Waco introducing a woman to preach in the church. If Siebert is serious about shepherding the flock God has given him, he needs to repent of this practice. It is a sin against the image of God, and against God Himself.

And how should we respond? We should never submit to listening to a woman attempt to preach. It is an abomination before Christ. It completely undermines Christ and His shepherds. It warps the Husband/Wife relationship of Christ and His Bride.

The Pastor Did Respond

To be fair, Siebert did respond to all the hubbub concerning this. It’s typical.

The problem with this response? There was NO CALL FOR REPENTANCE… he was just rehearsing the “compassion and clarity” trope that so many winsome, soft preachers fall back on. He does say that marriage is between one man and one woman. This is the very least he could do. But John the Baptist is nowhere to be found. There was no call to repentance and performing works worthy of repentance, just soft spoken platitudes of mercy and compassion. (Where is the compassion for the two motherless boys being parented by two gay men?) It was a feminized appeal to make everyone feel comforted, instead of a true call to the gospel.

Let me reemphasize my point: Saying one thing, marriage is between a man and a woman, is making lip service to the truth. Siebert is merely saying what he has to say. But in allowing a woman to preach in his church, he is showing us what he really believes. He really believes that men and women are interchangeable… especially in that which is most important: the preaching of God’s word, and holy matrimony.

It should be no shock to us that Chip and Joanna are confused. Hopefully, in light of the truths I’ve put forth here, Pastor Siebert will repent and be the shepherd he is called to be. He must stand strong on these issues.

Money Quote

As for Chip and Joanna, I think this a great explanation of their fall. See full article here

The Gaines aren’t the first Christian icons to slip from their built-on-solid-rock foundations. Jen Hatmaker, Joshua Harris, and even renowned theologian Richard B. Hays (whose son co-authored a 2023 pro-gay book with him before his death) all traveled the same downward slope allowing relationships to shape their theology. They arrived at a place where, on issues of gay relationships, they believe themselves more loving than God.

Inside Boyd’s Jig & Reel

We wanted live music, but not in an overcrowded bar. We thought about going down to Nashville and finding something there. But there are too many tourists. This wasn’t the case at Boyd’s. It was really a quiet night for the pub, since it was a Tuesday, but it had the sound of Bluegrass music, and some decent food.

Here is the view from inside the pub for a dash more photography.

All photos are copyright © Timothy J. Hammons.

 

Destination: Boyd’s Jig & Reel

Driving across Tennessee in mid June, Heidi and I decided we wanted to find a place that had live music, away from the typical live-music venues. She found a pub in Knoxville: Boyd’s Jig & Reel. They had a Bluegrass jam session. I’ve never sat and listened to live Bluegrass before, so it sounded exciting.

And the night was exciting.

When we got downtown, we found a parking lot a block away from the pub and started figuring out how much money we needed to pay to be in the lot.

The cloud in the following picture loomed over us.

Before we could figure out the cost, the cloud let loose. It was what I call a “gully washer.” Everything was immediately soaked, and had we not hopped back in the car, we would have been as well.

Heidi asked: “do you want to skip it?”

“No way. We’re here! Let’s go.” I wasn’t going to let a gully washer get in the way of live music, and good food.

I got her poncho out of the back of the car and about that time, the gully washer was done. We were still wet, but it didn’t matter. We headed up the street in search of the pub.

We made it just fine. The crowd was light, the music was pretty good, and the fish ‘n chips were decent.

The only drawback was that I was freezing the entire time. The AC in the place was working fine. No complaints. It was worth it.

All photos copyright © Timothy J. Hammons, 2025.

Waco Reformed Church: Is Tithing Still Required Under the New Covenant?

Steve Deace, a political Christian commentator, also loves to dabble in theology on his show, as well as on X. He puts forth the question, lets the conversation follow its course, and sometimes, takes the issue up on his show.

One such question is truly important for the believer, the question of tithes. Since he asked, we would like to answer. Our answer is based upon a sermon preached at Waco Reformed Church on December 11, 2022.

Introduction: A Call to Biblical Giving

Recently, we shared how the pastor from a large, Reformed church in Dallas spoke for four Sundays (in the late 1990s) about the subject of money and the Christian. The pastor prided himself on being able to preach four straight Sundays, and yet, say nothing about tithing until the last sermon, in which, he pointed out he had said nothing about tithing, and that he would continue saying nothing about tithing, in which, he concluded his four-part esoteric thought process on money.
There were many in the congregation who felt disappointed, questioning the conviction behind such an approach. One would expect THE shepherd of the flock, to instruct his followers on the tithe, since it is such an important part of the ministry.
While the church had an annual speaker who passionately urged its 8,000 members to give, using guilt and manipulation, in order to meet a multi-million-dollar budget, this abdication by the pastor felt insufficient. Instead of teaching what God’s word said about tithing, and the need for obedience to God’s Word, the church’s approach resembled more of a marketing campaign.
The problem with the sermon series on money, was that it did not answer core questions for those under the New Covenant: Are we obligated to tithe under the New Covenant? If so, how much? What’s the difference between a tithe and an offering?
We believe the pastor of that church, failed to shepherd his flock by being reluctant to address tithing. It seemed like he was driven more by fear than faith.
His course of action stemmed from fear of appearing self-serving and being like greedy televangelist. In other words, instead of letting the text and the topic drive his preaching, he was letting fear set the agenda. This is a shoddy approach to the work of a pastor, and is actually self-serving in the end.
Yet, if the principle of tithing is biblical, which we believe it is, then members of church should be instructed on the matter, and tithe.
As we will see, there are many reasons that we are instructed to tithe. The first reason that we deal with is what the Apostle Paul was dealing with in his first letter to the Corinthians: the right of the minister to live off the tithe. This is really the thrust of this article. We are given the principle for tithing, and that tithing is mean for our well being, in providing for the one God has ordained to feed us spiritually: the minister in the local congregation.
The second reason, which we deal with below, deals with our need to tithe as believers. We need to understand that we are giving our tithes to the LORD, even though the tithes are being used by the church to support the minister. This idea of giving tithes to the LORD is actually found in the negative, when the covenant people quit tithing, the LORD accused them of stealing from Him (see Malachi 3:8).

Supporting Gospel Ministers

Paul makes a great case for the support of gospel ministers in 1 Corinthians 9. In the context of that passage, Paul was facing constant attacks as ministers often do, from the false teachers who had moved into Corinth in his absence. One of the areas of accusation by these false teachers was in regards to the fact that Paul never received any financial support while in Corinth, even though he was entitled to do just that. His defense not only affirmed his role as an apostle but also provided a blueprint for supporting those who preach the gospel faithfully. Paul taught that apostles and ministers have the right to basic needs—like food, drink, marriage, or side work—decisions that belong to them, not a council or congregation. The congregation’s role is to help support the minister through their tithes.
Paul supported his case with practical examples: a soldier in the army is provided for by the country he represents. A farmer is provided for by the food he grows. A shepherd benefits from his labor taking care of the sheep. He then cited God’s Law, referencing Deuteronomy 25:4, which forbids muzzling an ox while it treads grain. This law ensures the animal eats while working, reflecting God’s care for His creation.
More importantly, Paul applies this same care to ministers, emphasizing that humans, made in God’s image, are of greater value than animals. If we care for an ox, how much more should we care for those who bring us the gospel?

The Principle of General Equity

Paul explains this principle in 1 Corinthians 9:9-10:
Is it oxen God is concerned about? Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope.
This is an example Paul uses is what has become known as the the principle of general equity of the law. that Paul is using when he uses a law about oxen, for the support of pastors. The principle is based on the reality that all of  God’s Law remains relevant for us today, however, the application may vary under the New Covenant. Therefore the care that was to be afforded to the oxen under the Old Covenant, is now to be afforded to the minister under the New Covenant. He is to be granted an income from the tithes of the congregation.
In verse 11, Paul continues:
If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things?
Using a rhetorical question, Paul is driving home the point: “you have been fed spiritually, which leads to your eternal salvation, therefore, is it anything at all that we reap from your temporary material things in order to live and continue to feed you spiritually?”
Paul’s point is that ministers do have a right to material support. The purpose of the tithe is to be used to support the minister that brings spiritual food. Though Paul chose not to exercise this right to avoid hindering the gospel, he affirms the expectation of tithing. If tithing were obsolete in the New Covenant, Paul would have said so here, but he doesn’t.

Jesus Affirms Tithing

But what about Jesus? Does He affirm the principle of tithing, or remove the principle?
We believe that Jesus upholds the principle of tithing in Matthew 23:23:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.
Jesus doesn’t rebuke the Pharisees for tithing but for neglecting justice, mercy, and faith. He affirms they should tithe while also pursuing these weightier matters, showing tithing’s place in the New Covenant. Had He wanted to remove the admonition to tithe, this was the time for Him to do so, just as Paul could have done so in 1 Corinthians. But neither Christ nor His apostle remove the admonition to tithe.

The Biblical Principle

Now please note that a biblical principle on interpretation needs to be stated: just because the New Covenant does not say the formulaic words, “thou shalt tithe,” doesn’t mean the principle doesn’t remain from under the Old Covenant. In fact, what we hope that you see, is that tithing actually predates the Old Covenant given under Moses, showing that it is a principle for all times, no matter the covenant.

Why do we tithe?

So, to be clear, let’s ask the simple question: why do we tithe? We tithe for two primary purposes:
  • First, our tithe honors God in that we recognize all we have is from Him.
  • Second, our tithes supports those who minister God’s Word.
To the first, we see this principle found in Deuteronomy 8:17-18:
…then you say in your heart, ‘My power and the might of my hand have gained me this wealth.’ And you shall remember the Lord your God, for it is He who gives you power to get wealth…
It is God who has granted us the ability to earn wealth. In fact, in every area of life, God has granted us the ability to live. Every true blessing we have is from Him. Therefore, as we grow in wealth, we are to remember where that wealth comes from, and return a portion to Him. This is our way of honoring God for the blessings He has bestowed upon us. 
As I have laid out above, Paul illustrates what the tithe is to be used for in 1 Corinthians 9:13-14:
Do you not know that those who minister the holy things eat of the things of the temple, and those who serve at the altar partake of the offerings of the altar? Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.
In the Old Testament, priests lived off tithes and offerings, as John Calvin notes: priests received portions of sacrifices, tithes, and firstfruits to sustain their families. This pattern continues today.
Ministers sow spiritual seeds and rightfully reap material support through tithes, which are ultimately given to God. By giving a portion of what we have been given, we honor God in that we recognize all we have been given is from Him.

The True Foundation of the Tithe

Where is the foundation of the tithe found in Scripture? As we mentioned above, this practice actually predates the Mosaic Covenant, originating with Abraham in Genesis 14:18-20, where Abraham gave a tenth of his spoils to Melchizedek, a priest and king who foreshadows Christ. Abraham’s tithe shows that we give to God through His appointed ministers. Melchizedek was acting as a king and a priest for Abraham in bringing him wine and bread, along with preaching the truth of God’s word.
What do we know about Melchizedek? His name means “King of Righteousness, King of peace.” His actions of bring the bread and wine to Abraham, symbolizing communion and fellowship with God. His blessing reminded Abraham that God, the Possessor of heaven and earth, gave him victory. Abraham responded by giving a tithe of the his booty, setting a pattern for God’s people.

Tithes vs. Offerings

Under the New Covenant, the principle of the tithe continues, and we tithe to Christ, the greater Priest and King, as Hebrews 7 and Colossians 2:9-10 affirm. Our tithes go to the church where we receive God’s Word and sacraments. We are not to divide up our tithe with other ministries as many people do. Our first priority is to provide to the congregation where we are being blessed by the faithful preaching of God’s word, and the administration of the sacraments. 
We can support other ministries, but that should come from our offerings, which are above our tithes.
We see the principle of the offering in 2 Corinthians 9:7 :
So let each one give as he purposes in his heart, not grudgingly or of necessity; for God loves a cheerful giver.
This verse refers to a special offering for suffering Christians in Jerusalem, and does not come from the tithe. Offerings are voluntary gifts given out of mercy, while tithes are an obedient 10 percent for the church’s ministry. 1 Timothy 5:17-18 supports the principle of the tithe as well, stating that elders who labor in preaching deserve support, echoing the principle of not muzzling the ox.

How Much Should We Give?

One other point needs to be stressed. We are to give a tithe to the church where we are fed spiritually, and a tithe is 10% of our income. The question then comes up: are we to tithe 10% on the gross of our income, or upon the net of the income. Or another way to ask it: are we to tithe on all the wheat we have in our field, or only that wheat which we get into the barn?
I hope you see the clear answer on this. The LORD knows that the crows will eat some of the wheat before we get it to the barn, and we are to leave some in the fields for the aliens. Therefore, we are to tithe that which we get home. Caesar will take his portion before we get it home to our barns. To require a tithe on all the wheat in the field, is an onerous burden. Not too many could actually do this.
But tithing on our goods that we bring home is a possibility. Yes, we need to budget for this and take steps to reach the goal of 10%. The more we strive to obedience to the LORD in this regard, the more a blessing the tithe becomes to us.

Conclusion: Giving Reflects Our Hearts

Jesus warns in Matthew 6:24 that we cannot serve both God and money. Tithing really does reveal where our heart is on the matter and if we are honest, we find that the thought of tithing is a burden we don’t want to mess with. But this should not be. We are to grow in our trust of the LORD, especially in being obedient to His calling on our lives. We do believe there is blessings in tithing. But we will not say as many do, that we will always be blessed even more financially if we faithfully tithe.
However, we will say that there is a spiritual blessing that is far greater when we tithe. We may not see it, but giving in return to the LORD, with a heart of gratitude, is a true spiritual blessing. It helps us to refocus on where are hearts should be, with the King and the Kingdom of Heaven.

Links:

Waco Reformed Church: What Makes us Different?

Waco Reformed Church: Substack

Waco Reformed Church: YouTube Channel

Waco Reformed Church: Facebook Page.

Waco Reformed Church: Website.

 

Waco Reformed Church — What About Feeding the Sheep?

In our previous post on what makes Waco Reformed Church different, I stated that the worship is not about feeding the sheep. Many people make the mistake of thinking this is the point of worship. The question even came up on x.com last week when Meg Basham posted the following:

As you can see, this is a common error that most people make when it comes to the purpose of the worship of the church. The purpose of worship is to focus upon and glorify God in the liturgy of the church. The focus is our Father, not the congregation. We are not looking to the congregation to dictate what we do in worship to glorify God. We are looking to His word.

Feeding the sheep is actually the stated purpose of the pastor. He is to feed the sheep “in worship.” Feeding definitely takes place “in worship.” But feeding the sheep is not the purpose of the church in worship.

We get the foundations of feeding the sheep from John 21:15-17. In that passage, we see Jesus reinstating Peter to the ministry by asking him three times, “Do you love Me?” With every affirmative answer that Peter gives, Jesus stated that Peter’s focus was to tend and feed His sheep.

He wasn’t speaking of literal food, although we do literally eat the bread in communion, as well as drink the wine of the table.  Jesus could well have been speaking of communion. The pastor is to serve communion every LORD’s day, and in this, as we partake by faith, the literal bread and wine feed us both physically and spiritually.

Milk and Solid Food

But primarily, when Jesus told Peter to “feed My sheep” HE was speaking of the word of God as the means for feeding them. The word of God is often referred to as milk or solid food (1 Corinthians 3:1-3, Hebrews 5:12-13, 1 Peter 2:1-3). It is, in the spiritual sense, the most important food there is, as we will see below. When the word of God is faithfully preached to the congregation, the congregation is being fed on a spiritual level.

Living Upon Every Word

We also know the word of God to be spiritual food from the Temptation of Christ in the wilderness. Satan tempts Jesus by challenging Jesus on being the Son of God. “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”

This was after Jesus had fasted for 40 days. Jesus was being tempted on His identity and for His basic physical needs. Yet, He did not give into the temptation, but responded by saying: “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.'”

The word of God is what sustains us spiritually speaking, for in His word, life is found. This is why the word as the food is the most important food we shall every dine upon. God’s words feeds us spiritually.

But please note also what Jesus said to Satan. Jesus says that we shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. This means we live from the entirety of the Bible, both the Old and New Testaments.

Far too many evangelicals want to “unhitch” themselves from the Old Testament, as if it were somehow holding us back from true spirituality. But please note: when Jesus preached the coming of the Kingdom of Heaven, He preached from the Old Testament. The same was true for Paul, and Peter, and Stephen, and all the rest of the men God ordained to preach in the first century.

We point this out because worship has to be informed by the entirety of God’s word, not just the New Testament as so many wish to believe. The Apostle Paul endeavored to preach the full counsel of God’s word to the Ephesian elders, and we should to the same (Acts 20:27).

Conclusion

The point of this post is to help you see that we are indeed fed spiritually by God’s word when we come to worship. But this feeding is not the purpose of worship. The purpose of worship it to actually worship the Father in Spirit and Truth. When this is done, God graciously feeds us the food we so desperately need. We can trust Him to serve us the meal we need. We will be nourished, cleansed, and sent out every LORD’s day for the purpose of His glory. But let us not make the mistake that many make: when we gather, we don’t do so for what we get out of it. We do so because He has called us to worship and He is glorified when we do.

Links:

Waco Reformed Church: What Makes us Different?

Waco Reformed Church: Substack

Waco Reformed Church: YouTube Channel

Waco Reformed Church: Facebook Page.

Waco Reformed Church: Website.

Tra’Paul

The third of five for the class of 2025: Tra’Paul.

Tra’Paul really challenged me as a teacher. But as you will see, we definitely formed a bond. I have more pictures of him, by far, than any other student. Why? Because of that bond. He challenged me and I tried to challenge him. And whenever we went anywhere, he was with me. He walked besides me. He would take my arm as we went down the hallway. He was never more than 35 to 85 feet from me (hyperbole), unless of course, I was looking for him. Which isn’t bad, inside the confines of Waco High School. But when when we were at Magnolia on a field trip? Or the mall? Or the train station?

But then, why was I worried? It was Tra’Paul. He wasn’t going to break anything, even though he wanted to touch everything. He was and is curious.

The real break through for me, was during his junior year. He did something out of line in the classroom, and I took him out into the hall to talk to him. AS I was reading him the riot act, he suddenly reached up and took my glasses off my face. I was speechless. I really thought he was going to twist my glasses into a pretzel.

I got my glass back and told him, “DON’T YOU EVER DO THAT AGAIN!”

So he didn’t.

He took both his hands and put them on my face. What? I thought he was about to hit me or something.

At this point, I was so angry at him, I had no idea what to do. So I called for behavior to come and deal with him.

I made sure to tell his sister, Shay, when she picked him up that afternoon. In fact, I may have called her to come and get him early. I told her what happened and that he had grabbed my face.

She said, “Mr. Hammons, he wasn’t going to hurt you. He was trying to make you smile.”

What?!? Make me smile? I was speechless and… humbled. This young man was more concerned with the fact that I wasn’t happy than anything else. Did I say I was humbled? My heart broke.

OK… That’s Tra’Paul. Yes, I get teary eyed, every time I think about it.

From that point on… I really began to understand. Tra’Paul is like a happy 5-year-old in a linebacker’s body. I had seen glimpses of this before, like the time I played an episode of Sid The Science Kid for the class. Tra’Paul was up, dancing and singing along with the entire show. In fact, he had the show memorized. We all laughed and he sang away.

After that one bit of information from Shay, I never really had any trouble with Tra’Paul again. Sure, he would wander off. He would try to beat the other kids to lunch. He would take his time whenever we were in a hurry. (I called it Tra’Paul time). But it was OK. That was Tra’Paul.

Because we had formed such a bond, I was asked to walk with him during graduation. We were not sure if he would get up and begin to walk around as we waited for his line of students to go up to the stage. I know I wanted to get up and walk around. Maybe that is the real reason they asked me to watch him. He wouldn’t let me do that.

So we sat together on the field. We walked together in the line. He waved at everyone that waved at him. He was so joyful going across the stage that I got so caught up in that when the administration told him congratulations, I said “thank you” as well.

After we got off the stage, his mother asked that I escort him back to her, so they could leave early.

“No Hammons!”

Tra’Paul was having none of it. He knew that graduation wasn’t over until he got to throw his hat. So we sat back down, waiting for the rest of the 800 other students to cross the stage. Did I say there were more than 800 students?

Finally, that moment came. He threw his hat. Then we had to wait until the school song was finished. And then… he still didn’t want to leave. He was soaking up every minute.

The only reason he left was that his sister came down onto the field and escorted him out. What a wonderful evening.

Enjoy the pictures, especially the graduation pics.

If you would like to see my post on Tonsie, click here.

If you would like to see my post on Jorge, click here.

I have two more posts to go: Austin’s and Isaiah’s.

My favorite picture from the night.

After crossing the stage.

With Tonsie. They went to the prom together.

Our walk to Benny ‘n Beaus. Anthony, Antianna, and Miranda graduated last year, class of 2024.

We got caught in a rain shower on the bridge over the Brazos.

As I said, he loved to touch everything, and try on some clothes. This was on a field trip to the mall.

Notice the railroad sign? So did he. He wanted to wait there until the train came by. It did about 30 minutes later.

 

The train finally came by, and we watched it from the top of the WACO ISD parking garage.

On the bridge over the Brazos.

Photobomb!

No, we did nog go inside to eat.

Our first trip to Bitty ‘n Beaus.

 

 

Never too old for the slide!

 

Leaving his mark!

The day we took the Amtrak train from Temple to McGregor.

When Tra’Paul works, he really works hard.

We decided to plant a garden in the courtyard and had to move some pavers in order to do so. Once he got the idea that they needed to be moved, he moved just about all of them.

Sadly, the courtyard had no water hose. Not a single seed came to fruition.

A pep rally for classmate Fidencio, who was on the district champion soccer team.

 

This was another project that Tra’Paul loved. We decided to paint murals on the walls, since we had no windows, and the walls were institutional white. Once we taught Tra’Paul what to do… he kept right on going.

I can remember saying, “Tra’Paul, put your brush down. No more painting. Your mother is here to pick you up.”

He didn’t want to leave.

All photos are copyright © Timothy J. Hammons, 2025. 

Waco Reformed Church — What Makes Us Different?

What would I say if someone were to ask: “What makes Waco Reformed Church different?”

That’s a hard question, simply because it’s difficult to know where to start. But I believe the best place to start is with the verse that is foundation to our worship, John 4:23-24. Just the fact that I felt a need to start with the subject of worship, should tell you something about who we are. As we learn from John’s Gospel:

23 But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers willworship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. 24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in Spirit and Truth.”

This verse is the starting point in informing our worship. There are two key points that should stand out. The first is that the Father is seeking such to worship Him. Since He is seeking us, then our gatherings on the LORD’s Day should be focused upon Him and worshipping Him. In seeking us, He is making the first move, to bring us into fellowship with Him, to worship Him.

This is a departure from much of what many churches do. Many seek to worship God, by focusing on evangelism, or feeding the flock, or entertaining the flock, or meeting the felt needs of those people who join them in worship. Hopefully you can see the difference already. Most church focus on the flock and what the flock needs in worship, instead of turning to God, and looking to His word to drive our worship.

This misguided focus is born out of a misunderstanding of the verse above and the second point that needs to be driven home, which I hope jumped out of you in the verse I quoted. Notice the capitalization added in verse 24.

24 God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in Spirit and Truth.”

Most translations do not capitalize Spirit and Truth. However, I believe it should be capitalized. To not do so, is again the same mistake that many churches make in forming their understanding of worship, which it is to be focused upon the one worshipping, and not the One worshipped. When we are not specific about worshiping in spirit and truth, then this leads it open to interpretation, and much error.

We need to turn it back around, and see Spirit and Truth as being rooted in God Himself. Without the Holy Spirit and the Truth (Christ) we cannot worship at all.

Both Christ and the Holy Spirit are essential for us to worship the Father. Christ is the atoning sacrifice needed to enter into God’s presence. The Spirit is the means by which we do. The blood of Christ washes us clean. The Spirit carries into the Holy of holies, or brings us to Mt. Zion (Hebrews 12). Without Christ or the Spirit, there is no amount of genuflecting we can do to please the Father. We must have the Spirit and the Truth.

When we are off of these things, then we err in thinking worship is about us, and for us. It is not. It is always about the Triune God and worshiping Him.

The sad reality of those who miss the directional change,  is that in the end, evangelism doesn’t take place, the flock isn’t truly fed, the entertainment never satisfies and demands more and more of the spectacular, and the felt needs simply change their feelings with each passing week.

When we begin our focus upon what God desires, then we begin to see the need for all of Scripture to inform our worship. We know and understand that we are not free to do anything we please when it comes to worshipping God. Simply see Leviticus 10:1-7, the story of Nadab and Abihu offering profane fire before the YHWH. YHWY brought immediate judgment upon them for doing so.

This simple principle shows us the need to look to Scripture to inform our worship. This of course, is more than I want to say here. But I would say that this is the biggest item that makes our worship different from the average evangelical church. The focus begins and ends with the Triune God.

In changing the focus from ourselves, to God, then true evangelism will take place. The feeding of the flock will occur. The need for entertainment will righfully be replaced with the desire to honor our Father. The felt needs we think we have, will melt away with the realization that our real needs are being met because we re letting God’s Truth, His Spirit, His word, work in us, instead of trying to replace all these things with what we think should be there. It really is about trusting in God, His word and His provisions for us.

Now, I’m not saying we are the only church in town with such and understanding. There are other parts of the body of Christ who are spot on, but this point itself sets us on the right path. And this is one of the key differences that set us apart from others in the evangelical world.