Christian Prosperity Theology: Antithetical to or in line with the message of Jesus?

Great Debates
1

Inspired by an article in Time Magazine (Does God want you to be rich?), and not wanting to hijack a 19 page thread in the Pit (as if that’s possible), I decided to open this topic (with some trepidation) here in GD.

The linked article covers the current trend of Prosperity Theology, a burgeoning movement dedicated to the idea that God wants his people to gain not only their soul, but the whole world.

I should posit right here at the start that I’m not a Christian, but did come from a Christian background and culture, which still surrounds me, at least in terms of local geography. And in that culture, which is quite Calvinist, it was long a tenet of faith that being one of God’s Elect would be demonstrated by success in the material world. This was counterbalanced by the Calvinist fear of being seduced by the material world, so gaudy and ostentatious shows of wealth were not all that common, and generally frowned upon. Even so, that message always seemed a bit discordant to me, even as a child.

However, I was a bit taken aback by the reported findings in the article, particularly that 61% of Christians believed that God wants people to be prosperous. And 31% agreed that if you give your money to God, God will bless you with more money.

What do our Christian Doper Debaters say on this? I guess I am most interested in hearing from those folks who consider themselves followers of Jesus Christ on this, rather than from those recently busy pointing out the flaws and contradictions of the faith from the outside. (Yes, that can be an interesting exercise, and one I have some sympathy for, but not here). So I hope this thread doesn’t turn into another Christians vs. Christian detractors argument.

2

Thanks for the post. If you read the Apostolic Gospels do you not come to the conclusion that in Jesus’ view a wealthy Christian is an oxymoron. If so, who is the biggest oxymoron of all? Come on Pope tell us the true value of your estate.

3

I just picked up the DVD of In the Name of the Rose which, for those who haven’t seen it, is about a series of murders at a remote medieval abby, just before a vital theological debate between the Franciscans and the emissary of the Pope, with broad political ramifications. The subject of the debate: Did Christ own his clothes?

Unfortunetly, all the murders caused the debate to end before a consensus was reached, which is why we still have this question before us today.

4

Just as an aside (but a relevant one), I remember the whole PTL Club/Jim and Tammy Bakker scandal (as I was living in the area at the time). After the press got in and saw the surroundings that the Bakkers lived in (Gold-plated bathroom fixtures, an air-conditioned dog house, etc), they asked Tammy about this very question. Her response (in rough paraphrase form. It has been a couple of decades):

yes, her english was that bad.

5

Not an active Christian any more here, but … IMO where this theology fails is where it lends itself to a “perverse incentive” – when in order to show your blessing you seek to maximize profit.

Now, when the Gospel talks about the whole camels and eyes of needles thing, you have to see that in context of other JC quotes such as “blessed are the poor in spirit” – that is, who are not tied up to their material wealth – and “you can’t serve both God and Mammon” – it doesn’t say it’s bad to be incidentally rich, but that you must seek only to please God, not to maximize your take. When Jesus faces the wealthy young man and says “so, sell everything” and the WYM loses his nerve, it’s not an indictment of wealth per se but of its addiction: the WYM is unwilling to give it up even for God’s sake.

The Sermon of the Mount also includes the passage about the birds and the lillies – “God will Provide”. Doesn’t sound too promising of financial bonanza, just that you’ll be taken care of – see also the Widow’s Mite (her offering is worthier than the rich man’s, because it’s literally all she has).

Then again when Magdalene annoints Jesus with very expensive oils, and is rebuked for extravagance, JC counter-rebukes that you should look at the spirit and intention in which she did this (“the Poor you shall always have with you”). And there are parables in which he uses as an example of right thinking or action stories about sound business management…

We do have to recognize that in the particular environment out of which JC arises, how well or badly you did in this life was viewed as a sign of whether you were pleasing God. That never really went away in Christianity, and the Reformed churches, if anything, re-democratized that element of JudeoChristian tradition into the famed “Protestant Work Ethic”.

So you have an overall vibe that you should not make wealth and financial security the priority of your life, or even worry too much about how well you do, and indeed should be willing to endure hardship; but at the same time you are** not** censured just for incidentally doing well economically, AS LONG as that is not your primary goal: but rather* pleasing God * should be your goal. (Plus of course, you must be ethical and generous with your wealth if you do have it) “Prosperity Gospel”, IMO, sounds too much like it’s playing with definitions so that seeking wealth is front-loaded into the definition of “pleasing God”, thus begging the question.

AND one important part of the whole traditional structure of “blessings in this Life” was, that it is absolutely up to God’s Will, to grant or not that worldly blessing: he does not “owe” it to you. Some preachers of “Prosperity Gospel” come dangerously close to suggesting that the Big Cheese is somehow contractually bound to pay you off. There is a passage to the effect that “you will be rewarded tenfold here and hundredfold in Heaven” but I had always interpreted that as in the sense of happiness, rather than cash.

6

I disagree completely with the Christian Prosperity Theology. IMO, God wants us to share, regardless of what we have.

I would say that many of the best and most spiritual people I know are not rich, and many are poor (by American standards anyway). Their lack of wealth does not mean that they are unrighteous or not blessed.

The principle of tithing, IMO, does promise blessings, but it does not promise material wealth. IME it does frequently mean that you’ll be able to get by–but it doesn’t mean you’ll be wealthy.

Some good people do get rich. Whether that’s a sign of God’s blessing or not (and that would be different in individual cases–for many people, wealth means a moral downfall), the blessing of wealth is one that is used properly by sharing it. People who build disgustingly ostentatious mansions with their wealth cannot be said to be using it righteously unless they’re using those homes to house poor single mothers or something. (Now, of course, for all I know those wealthy people might be giving 80% of their money to help AIDS victims in Africa and using the other 20% to build mansions, so it’s not my job to judge their decisions, but I’m speaking theoretically and not addressing actual individual cases.)

IME God does some tailoring of our blessings and trials. For one person, money might be a blessing to be used with good judgement. For another, it might be a trial and temptation that proves difficult to overcome. A lack of wealth might be better for some of us than riches would be (and I put myself in that category).

7

Actually, no. I do not come to that view. Poverty Theology is just as insidious a heresy as is Prosperity Theology. The poor & powerless and the rich powerful can be equally as vicious or just as virtuous as the rich & powerful. The former just lack the resources & range of harm or help they can cause. I do believe that God generally wants His people to have their essential needs met, and out of any surplus, to help others meet their needs and then come to they place where those others can help others & so forth. Alas, when the Prosperity Preachers really start rolling along, the responsibility of those who are so blessed kind of gets overlooked, as well as the Gospel of Salvation through Christ in general.

In the interest of full disclosure, my “Church-away-from-Church” is Robert Schuller’s Crystal Cathedral, which can be accused of being the Bethlehem of
Prosperity Theology, but which IMO has actually avoided the heresies of it &
kept a more even keel (the fact that it is part of the Dutch Reformed Church
& AFAIK never become unaccountable to it probably helps greatly).

8

I enjoyed your post and agree. How would the good Samaritan have accomplished the good he did if living in poverty. If someones gift is a sound but honest business mind that’s not a sin. It creates jobs and income for others. It’s a matter of priorities. If the desire for wealth causes you to step on or ignore the needs of others or be less than honest and call it “just business” then you’ve taken a step back.

I think it also has to do with hording your possessions while others are in need. How large a HD TV do I need when some people are going hungry?

9

What you think is “insidious heresy” and what Christ taught are two different things. Jesus was quite clear on his admonishments of the rich and his praise for poverty. While I think peoples striving to be poor isn’t the smartest thing in the world, and it seems you agree, it is what Jesus taught. As I’ve said before, if you don’t like it you should probably worship somebody else.

10

Just a reminder from the OP:

I will add my own “pul-leeese?”

The emphasis on prosperity was a big turn-off for me at one church that I attended for a while. It just seemed so self-serving. But on the other hand, some of the most devoted Christians I’ve known have been unusually wealthy.

I think JR had a great post.

11

It’s your interpretation of select scriptures. Did you read JRDelirious post about priorities. I think thats more in line with what Jesus taught.

Rather than worshiping someone else another choice is to simply not agree with you.

12

My views on the topic are largely consonant with JRD’s, as are the majority of Christians.’

These numbers bear considerable interpretation.

**“God wants people to be prosperous.” **

To begin with, maybe I’m a minority here, but prosperous to me doesn’t just mean “rich.” It connotates a holistic state of well-being, including financial stability but not limited to it. ISTM that if Time was looking for an accurate reading (instead of, oh I dunno, hoping to get results to match the cover article they were already working on) they could have picked “rich” or “wealthy.”

The other problem with the phrasing is it implies that a “no” answer means that God actively desires that people to be indigent, which few Christians believe. Of course Christans believe God wants people to be prosperous; they also believe he wants them to be healthy, happy, well-fed, emotionally fulfilled etc. The fact that we aren’t, and in some cases never will be, is a consequence of living in a fallen world. But that doesn’t change the fact that God desires that we have all good things sooner or later. Indeed, Christians are explicitly promised that they will someday have prosperity beyond anyone’s wildest dreams … not that cash figures all that high on the list of heaven’s rewards.

"31% agreed that if you give your money to God, God will bless you with more money."

I think well over 31% of the population would agree with the proposition that “if you are nice to the world, the world will be nice to you.” Even I’d be willing to accept this statement if it was understood in a general Karmic-tendency sense. No good thing you do is wasted, and the good you do will be repaid, now or in the hereafter. This goes for all good deeds, including giving away your money to the needy.

None of which to deny that Prosperity Theolgy exists and has been growing for decades; but I think those numbers imply that it is bigger than it really is.
Where Prosperity Theology goes wrong – damnably wrong – is by reducing the Almighty to a gumball machine: drop a penny in the slot and your blessing comes out; give to my church now and you’ll be guaranteed a Cadillac later. That is … at least bullshit, if not heresy.

To be perfectly frank, it makes me long for the days of the Inquisition. My fallen, unredeemed nature hopes that the scumbags who prey on the credulous like that occupy the lowest circle of hell.

13

My view on the subject, as a Christian:

I don’t think God really cares one bit whether or not you have money, or how much. What is important is not how much you have, but what you do with it. You can be poor and be a greedy asshole; you can be rich and be a kind, loving philanthropist.

As for how Christians in general feel, I’ll bet it breaks down like this:

10% feel that poverty is “Godly”, and that prosperity is evil (none of these people are rich)

10% feel that God calls on Christians to gain as much wealth as possible, and provides for them toward that end (all of these people are rich)

80% think more or less the same way I do. If we live good Christian lives, and work hard, God will see to it that we are provided for, each according to his needs. But at the same time, we must remember that “God helps those who help themselves”.

Of course, as always, its the 20% on the fringes (on both ends) that make all of the noise.

14

No I really don’t try to “interpret” much. What I said was what Jesus taught, as described in the gospels. One can, and around here people frequently do, say that Jesus really didn’t mean what he said, but that’s their thing, not mine.

Upon first reading it I thought it was a pretty good post. Upon rereading it, I think he inserted a lot of ambiguity about the possession of wealth that Jesus did not insert. JRDelirious missed some important relevant verses, some of which include:

*“Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Matthew 6:19-21

“Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Luke 12: 33-34*

It is also worth pointing out that when contrasting the fate of Lazarus with that of his associate in hell. Lazarus’ friend was sent to hell, not because he was evil, but because he was rich. Also Ananias and his wife were struck dead by god, not because they did not give generously, but because they did not give everything they had. There is more, but what the statements of Jesus lack is the fine distinction put forth by JRDelirious that allow Christians to be both rich and followers of Chists teachings.

The Old Testiment is a different story, and the idea of giving to god, bringing about a healty return is and Old Tesiment one…

“Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.” Malachi 3:10

… as is the idea of God’s earthly hero’s being rich (Job, David, Solomon etc.). However all this OT stuff is contrary to the teachings of Jesus, and on this board it is very popular for Christians to try and distance themselves from the teachings and acts from the OT, and as well they should, else it is game on.

By not agreeing with me they are not agreeing with Jesus. By saying my interpretations are incorrect, they are saying the words of Jesus are incorrect. If one thinks that the teachings of Jesus are ignorant, or backward, then I’ll stick with my earlier statement and say they probably should worship someone else, or preferably worship nobody at all.

15

Lazarus’s “friend”? Did you really read the story? There’s a little more to it than what you say, in both of the stories you bring up here. For someone who claims not to interpret much, you’re not doing a very good job of presenting the clearest, most obvious meanings.
To the OP: I don’t really have anything to add to what others have already said. Except that, by calling Prosperity Theology a “burgeoning movement,” I hope you’re not giving people the idea that it’s something new. The idea has been around for a long time, as have the Christian preachers and teachers who deny it and point out its dangers.

16

Ananias and his wife were, to my understanding, struck dead not because they didn’t give all they had but because they LIED about it.

17

I use the word friend rhetorically, if you prefer I’ll try to use the word acquaintance next time.

Yes I read it and here it is:

“There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. Luke 16: 19-25

In the above story you will note that the rich man did no harm to Lazarus. It does not depict the rich man as doing any evil act. It does not depict Lazarus as doing any good acts. It does not even say that the rich man’s future torment was because he failed to feed Lazarus. Rather it does say that because the rich man had good things in life and Lazarus bad things that the roles would be reversed in the afterlife. If there is anything I missed, I hope you’ll let me know.

As to why the rich man didn’t go out of his way to support Lazarus? It does not say. Perhaps he thought Lazarus should get a job.

Also, while I think the teachings of Jesus are generally ripe with contradictions, I don’t see any with his views on wealth and poverty. Notice that nowhere in this thread has anyone put forth verses where Jesus says wealth is ok.

18

Yeah that’s what Peter said in Acts chapter 5. Ananias held back and Peter accuses him of lying to the Holy Spirit. It does not say that Ananias told a lie, it’s quite possible he was quite about it, but even if he did lie, it was to Peter, to which Peter than charged up as a lie against god/the Holy Spirit. Regardless Ananias immediately gave up the ghost in what seems like a very unforgiven way. It seems his wife later did lie, but Peter challenged her for tempting the spirit of the lord, at which point she fell down dead too.

Undeniably, what they did was not give everything they had. Rather than being given credit for giving a lot, and forgiveness for not being forthright about giving it all, they were struck dead.

19

Methinks JRDelirious and dangermom and FriarTed have hit the high points quite well, but there is another aspect to the belief.

Sin has consequences, both in the next world and in this one. If you are able to avoid sin, (not that this always happens) then you are also then able to avoid the bad consequences of that sin. It is often the case that this leaves you better off even in a material sense.

If you deal honestly with your customers, then you are much less likely to fear a sting on dishonest businesses in your area. If you act towards your wife as a servant leader the way Promise Keepers recommends, then you are less likely to divorce and thus avoid the financial drawbacks of divorce. If you care for your children when they are young, then they tend to take care of you in your old age. And so forth.

None of this is guaranteed, of course. Suffering and persecution are the only guarantees we get in this life from Jesus. But being in the correct relationship with God thru Christ means automatically that you are going to be working to be in the correct relationship with your neighbor.

But I have heard the sort of “send us your savings and God will make sure you make millions” and I tend to assume automatically it is a rip off. And not sound theology, IMO.

Regards,
Shodan

20

Lynchburg, Virginia
Attention: The Head of the Family

Dear Sir,

Confidential Salvation Proposal

Having consulted with my Lord and based on the information gathered from the Heavenly Office of the Treasury, I have the privilege to request your assistance to transfer the sum of $47,500,000.00 (forty seven million, five hundred thousand United States dollars) into your accounts. The above sum resulted from an over-invoiced contract, executed, commissioned and paid for about two (2) milennia ago by a celestial contractor. This action was however intentional and since then the fund has been in a suspense account at The Central Bank Of Heaven Bank.

We are now ready to transfer the fund overseas and that is where you come in. It is important to inform you that as celestial servants, we are forbidden to operate a worldly account; that is why we require your assistance. The total sum will be shared as follows: 70% for us, 25% for you and 5% for local and international expenses incidental to the transfer.

The transfer is risk free on both sides. I am a representative of the Celestial Reciprocity Appreciation Pact (CRAP). If you find this proposal acceptable, we shall require the following documents:

(a) your banker’s name, telephone, account and fax numbers.

(b) your private telephone and fax numbers — for confidentiality and easy communication.

© proof of your acceptance of Christ as your Lord and Savior.

Alternatively we will furnish you with the text of what to pray to accept Christ as your Lord and Savior, along with a breakdown explaining, comprehensively what we require of you. The business will take us thirty (30) working days to accomplish.

Please reply urgently.

Best regards

Jerry L. Falwell, D.D.sub[/sub], D.Litt.sub[/sub], LL.D.sub[/sub]