The [Apostolic] Prosperity Gospel

[NorCal]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

1, one, uno instance of NT shows the people giving all and living with all things common. It is not echoed in any other NT letter. Nor is it recorded in early Church history to my knowledge. This argument is dishonest at best.

Second, you are asking the wrong question. The proper question would be "should we have expensive buildings and massive debt for church buildings to begin with". Nowhere are we commanded to go and build church buildings. You have to look centures, as in hundreds of years) past the Apostles to find the dedicated church building become common.

Massive debt? A church will seat 100 people will cost about $700K or more. That includes parking lot and everything. It is not cheap to build a church from scratch. However; good luck having consistent "gathering of the saints" in your own house. There are zoning laws about that (as we have seen as of late).

As for scripture: Acts Chapter 5 is where Ananias and Sapphira were examples of "Giving all" but they kept a portion and lied about it.

Acts Chapter 4: 32-37 were examples of New Testament Giving. Chapter 5 explains what was the result of that. Later, Paul writes about the church at Jerusalem starving because that had no means of income, because that had sold all their land (or means of income) and the churches of Asia had to send money to help them.


However, it is kinda funny, you non-tithers sound just like the OWS crowd. Take take take, but never understand what a fair share really is. Every, Non-Tither church I have seen here in my city, has shut down in these hard time. The Tithers, doors are open, handing out charity to the others.

From a business standpoint, the strategy works. The basic biblical principle of tithes and offerings works.

EDIT: I think I threw this thread off a bit.

Name it and Claim it does not work. Only the "Will of God" works. Let us pry "Thine Will be Done."

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

What is disturbing to me is that there seems to be no real concern for the real meaning of the text. To read personal finances into the Lord's prayer is to have complete disregard for the context itself.

The Lord’s prayer has essentially nothing to do with financial debt. To read personal finances into it is to completely disregard the clear meaning of the text. To go a step further and claim that financial dominion is at stake in the believers life is nothing short of psychological manipulation. The word debt in Matthew 6:12 plainly refers to sin, not any kind of financial debt. This point is further driven home when at the conclusion of the Lord’s Prayer Jesus expounds on verse 12 in verses 14-15 which read 14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Matt 6:14-15 (KJV) The word that Jesus uses for trespasses in v.14&15 in explaining the meaning of v.12 is the word paraptoma, translated trespass, fall, fault, sin. For example it is the word used in Ephesisans 1:7 “In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.” There should be absolutely no doubt about the meaning of the word debt in Matthew 6:12. It simply does not have financial overtones, either explicitly or implicitly.
Luke 11:4 is a parallel scripture in which Luke uses the word harmartia which is translated sins. That word is used 174 times in the Greek New Testament, 172 times it is translated sin, 1 time sinful, and 1 time offense.
Furthermore Matthew 18:21-35 expounds on the same topic and subject manner as Matthew 6:12,14-15 where debt is used in a parable, with the point being the same debt is sin. True enough in the parable the debt is a financial debt, however the word translated debt in Matthew 18:27 is not the same word used in Matthew 6:12. And a simple study of the parable reveals that the debt is like unto our sin debt, which is so great we couldn’t repay it to God if we lived a thousand lifetimes. We owe a debt to God because of our sins which we have absolutely no means to pay, but God freely forgives us, and because of this we are to forgive others in like manner as God forgave us.
In addition to these things apparently one would have to look long and hard to find any reputable scholar or commentator willing to accept such an interpretation of Matthew 6:12. From what I was able to dig up on the fly, NO source was willing to endorse any such idea. The overwhelming interpretation is simply that debts=sins, not money, not financial peace, financial dominion, or financial prosperity.

There are six petitions in this prayer. It is appropriate that the first three concern God directly: his name, his kingdom, his will. The Christian’s primary concerns therefore are that God’s name be hallowed, that his kingdom come, that his will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Only then are the next three petitions introduced, and they have to do with man directly: our daily food, our sins (“our debts”), and our temptations. Sin is pictured in the prayer as a debt. Sin incurs a debt which must be discharged. In Aramaic, which is the language Jesus probably uses in preaching this sermon, it is not uncommon to refer to sin as a debt. ~D.A. Carson, The Sermon on the Mount, pg.61-62,68

“Sin is not nowdays a popular word. Men and women rather resent being called , or treated as hell-deserving sinners.” Barclay then goes on to explain there are 5 different words translated sin in the New Testament “The fifth word for sin is the word opheilema which is the word used in the body of the Lord’s prayer; and opheilema means a debt. It means a failure to pay that which is due, a failure in duty. There can be no man who will ever dare to claim that he has perfectly fulfilled his duty to man and to God: such perfection does not exist among men.”~ William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, pg.219-221

“The confession of debts is in relation to our sins or debts owed to God.”~Myron S. Augsurger, The Preacher’s Commentary, pg.82

“The Greek word for debts in the New Testament appears only here and Romans 4:4. It is clear that Jesus and Matthew intended the word to mean “sins” here (Luke 11:4). The choice of this word reflects the fact that all sins place us in debt to God.”~Stuart K. Weber, The Holman New Testament Commentary, Matthew, pg. 82

“Our sins are debts.”~Matthew Henry, The NIV Matthew Henry Commentary in One Volume, Matthew, Pg. 28

“The sinner and the debtor are most certainly related. Sin makes us all debtors to God.”~The Wycliffe Bible Dictionary, Debt, pg. 444

“Debt is used as a synonym for sin in Mt 6:12. The word chosen is to emphasize our duty of forgiveness.”~Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, Debt, pg. 183

Here’s the point: Those in Berea “were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” Acts 17:11. The church in most cases is simply unwilling to hold its ministers accountable. People don’t want the confrontation and controversy which comes with holding someone accountable to be true to the context of the Word. We are too often simply unwilling to divest ourselves into any kind of deep study of the Word, and so such statements go unchallenged because frankly the congregation doesn’t know the difference. As such the prosperity gospel grows in influence in churches which claim to be Apostolic, i.e, teaching and conforming to the Apsotles’ doctrine. That sounds good, but it is like the Mormons saying they believe in grace. As one man commented, “you are using God’s vocabulary, but not God’s dictionary.”
It is true that God desires to bless us, and it is true that the Bible speaks of favorably of prosperity. It is also true that the Bible allows for teachers of the Word to be compensated by the saints. However, the Bible also speaks quite sternly against covetousness, making merchandise of the people of God, warns of people who will make religion a profitable business, taking advantage of those who don’t know any better, speaks against people being taught to give through compulsion, speaks against giving to get, and instructs New Testament saints “You must each decide in your heart how much to give. And DON’T GIVE reluctantly or IN RESPONSE TO PRESSURE.”2 Cor 9:7 (NLT) (emphasis added)
I believe it is time that the church demand contextual responsibility from its preachers. And that preachers make it their desire to be faithful stewards of the Word of God, not peddlers of cheap doctrines, popularized by con men in the most literal sense. One need not be an enemy of such men who have been influenced by the prosperity doctrines. Paul withstood Peter to his face because Peter was in the wrong. They continued to have a great relationship, Peter even referred to Paul's letters as scripture. Just because I'm pointing out these issues don't assume my motive is evil. In fact to assign a motive without knowing the true intents is to falsely accuse or bear false witness against your neighbor. I have not assigned an evil motive to any man in particular, what I am saying is this prosperity theology is complete error and as God's people we need to recognize that error, expose that error, and abandon that error as fast as we can.

Right on, and an excellent post! As my friend Barefoot Pilgrim has pointed out, it becomes "filthy lucre" when used this way.

Now, about that tithe.....

[Scott Hutchinson]

http://www.pimppreacher.com/Spiritual-Mind-Control.html

[BeenThinkin]

Now I was just thinkin' ..... you know, Been Thinkin.... Maybe I could have them throw money at me, get a big pile of it, go make a deposit, and then repent! Would that work? lol

Been Thinkin

[freeatlast]

I fear that many of our church budgets spend the majority of their income on clothing housing and feeding one family in the church.

Little is left sometimes to do anything constructive in the community.

[Titus2woman]

Originally Posted by NorCal

Name it and Claim it does not work. Only the "Will of God" works. Let us pry "Thine Will be Done."

Name it and claim it is a false doctrine that claims that one can force God to give them stuff by giving stuff, like a formula. It is an unscriptural doctrine.

Tithing is a false doctrine that extorts 10% of a persons gross income by claiming that they will be cursed, killed or spend eternity in a tormenting hell for the sin of 'robbing God'. It too is an unscriptural doctrine.

The New Testament principle for financial stewardship is called giving. If a group of called ones is not able to maintain whatever they are responsible for by giving then teaching should be implemented in basic discipleship including stewardship. If those principles can not be instilled in the group than it might be better if that group does break up and each member move into a place where they can grow into spiritual maturity. By the same token if a group has to be lied to, strong armed, coerced, deceived or threatened to 'tithe' than it is probably also better if that group breaks up and seeks fellowship somewhere that will grow them to personal maturity as individuals, whether they can afford to stay together or not. In both cases there is a lack of cheerful giving, the only kind that God accepts, after all He really does not need our money.

[bbyrd009]

"Is the Bible our final authority for ALL church doctrine and practice?"

becomes too general a Q, I think, due to interpretation?

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I happen to know that preacher very well, and he's the least money-hungry person I've ever known. And most definitely not self-seeking.

Don't forget that sound-bites can be taken way out of context, and you can't judge someone or their ministry by one sound-bite.

Leaving aside the comments about tithing not being scriptural, or no designation for tithes being scripturally offered (aren't you supposed to tithe where you are spiritually fed, according to scripture?) I'd like to suggest that this quote, and the comment (maybe still) above this one, by Titus2woman, I believe? Points to the simple solution of judging each ministry by its fruit; a pretty simple task nowdays, despite any lack of disclosure. (well, lack of disclosure might be your first clue...)
May as well start with "that preacher?"

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by Titus2woman

Tithing is a false doctrine that extorts 10% of a persons gross income by claiming that they will be cursed, killed or spend eternity in a tormenting hell for the sin of 'robbing God'. It too is an unscriptural doctrine...

I can only imagine how our individual images of tithing became so disparate; but I have never felt "extorted," and would laugh in the face of anyone who made the claims that your shorthand (I presume) above attributes to "tithing." I would have to get my ducks lined up to present a good argument, here, but this seems to be a great description of what tithing is not? Without even looking, Christ Himself as much as said that extorted money is not a tithe?

[AreYouReady?]

Titus2woman is correct.

[Titus2woman]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

I can only imagine how our individual images of tithing became so disparate; but I have never felt "extorted," and would laugh in the face of anyone who made the claims that your shorthand (I presume) above attributes to "tithing." I would have to get my ducks lined up to present a good argument, here, but this seems to be a great description of what tithing is not? Without even looking, Christ Himself as much as said that extorted money is not a tithe?

Besides the fact that there is no scripture to support New Testament tithing there is a lot wrong with it on a common sense level too.

A flat 10% will severely affect the poor in a negative way while someone with a good income will not even feel it and may have much more than they will ever need in their lifetime left over after a tenth. Yet with our inability to avoid being respecters of persons we will naturally give a place of honor to the one who gives most.

For those reasons the bible tells us to give as we are prospered. For someone wealthy that might mean giving the 90% and living on the 10%... When was the last time you saw that happen? Also the church should be supporting the poor... In a real giving situation the plate could be passed with those who can giving and those with needs taking from it... Now does that sound weird? Yes to most it will... because even when we give we are used to someone else determining HOW that money is spent.

We have in essence hired someone to help our poor, visit our sick, marry and bury us. And in the worst cases do our studying, praying and fasting. And that is paid for most often with the 'tithe'... no wonder we love it... what a bargain! If we 'paid up' in a real way how much harder would it be?