About a week ago, I wrote a short post on Facebook and my blog, about Healing and Prosperity. It was reflections on meetings with a Prosperity Preacher who came to my church, and then was asked to leave. Some of you have asked me to take a deeper dive into his teaching, and so here we are.
I am not a professional Minister of the Gospel, and I in no way represent my local church. These opinions are my own. I am not trying to harm this man, but I do want to pull up the shiny vinyl outdoor carpet of his Prosperity worldview, to expose the mold and rotten floor below. After he left my church, he started a week of live broadcasts on YouTube, as a fundraiser, calling it the "SpiteAThon2023." The subtitle of the first video of his series was "What Happens When You Go To Another Level AND 21 Questions to Ask Those Who Don't Believe In Prosperity." This post is my own commentary on the first part of his first live broadcast in his series, comparing his own words and scripture cited to what I believe the bible actually teaches.
Here is the link to the first broadcast, posted over a week ago, and is my primary source for his teachings on this blog: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVdnthjoYOQ . As of the start of his Day Five broadcast, his first four videos already had 37,600 views, so clearly, this is a topic of keen interest to the church at large. I won't comment on everything on his three hour video, but I am trying to address significant places where I believe he goes out of bounds. I include the approximate time stamps in my commentary, so you can find it in his broadcast and listen yourself, if you are so inclined. The first nine minutes or so are his opening arguments and personal testimonies, presented like a trial lawyer. You tell the Jury what you're going to show them, you show them, and then you tell them what you showed them. It is his elevator speech, given in every venue. And it's a good one. Unfortunately, it's just not the whole truth.
0.18 "Everybody that God ever made a covenant with in the Bible, he turned land over to them. The first gift God gave man was land, in the Garden of Eden. The thing the devil tried to keep from the Israelites was land. God made a covenant with Adam to give him land. God made a covenant with Noah- gave him land. God made a covenant with Moses- Gave him land. God made a covenant with us, and he's going to give us the whole earth."
Not really, no. Genesis 1:27-30 tells us what God actually gave Adam and Eve-- plants for food. Further on, Genesis 2:15 describes Adam's status in the Garden of Eden:
The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.
God didn't give the Garden to Adam. God gave him fresh food from the Garden. From God's Garden. Adam wasn't the owner, he was the gardener. The Caretaker. The Worker, not the Owner. And after Adam and Eve defied God's instructions and ate the forbidden fruit, God banished them permanently from God's Garden.
But didn't God give Noah land? Again, No. Genesis 9: 3 tells us what God actually gives Noah-- is more food options. God had given Adam plants for food, and now gives Noah an expanded dinner menu- the right to eat tasty animals. (Sorry, PETA joke.) Then, in verses 8-11, God DOES make a covenant with Noah, but it doesn't involve land, and it's not exclusively with Noah!
Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: I now establish my covenant with you and your descendants after you, and with every living creature that was with you... all those that came out of the ark with you- every living creature on earth. I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be cut off by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the whole earth."
When he preached at my church, he used God's directive to Noah in Genesis 9:7 "As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it" as a proof text, saying the command "multiply and increase upon it" means Prosperity. As in, Stuff. But clearly, God is actually telling Noah to have lots of kids!
But what about Moses? Also, No. God DID give a particular parcel of land to Abraham and his descendants descendants, (see Genesis 12:1, Genesis 15:18, Exodus 33:1, and Deuteronomy 34,) but I don't see anywhere where God gives Moses his own personal piece of land. He didn't mention Abraham in his opening statement, which surprises me actually, since that it the only covenant I can think of in the Bible that ACTUALLY involves land. But as far as Abraham is concerned, Hebrews 11 tells us:
"By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know were he was going. By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God..."
"All these people were still living by faith when they died. They did not receive the things promised; they only saw them and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted that they were aliens and strangers on the earth. People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had an opportunity to return. Instead, they were longing for a better country- a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them..."
Apparently, they were more focused on their heavenly future than on terra firma, but this particular Prosperity Preacher is obsessed with owning land here. In fact, the Title Screen at the start of the Video series is "Possessing the Land." You may think he is being metaphorical, about advancing the Kingdom of God. But he is really talking about actual dirt. His current project to to build a new megachurch in Pittsburg on a beautiful 24 Acre hill on Mt. Nebo Road. "God always give his people land," he said from our pulpit, over and over. "Land, silver, and gold." He is equating the promise of a particular chunk of land in the middle east given to the descendants of Abraham to it being the spiritual birthright of Christians today to personally own real estate. Land, and other Stuff, is seductive. Americans in particular are in danger of falling in love with a white picket fence because Life is just so... so GOOD here. The American dream. It's nice. It can be helpful, but it's not actually important in the grand scheme of things unless it advances the Kingdom of God. We American Christians really ARE living the good life here. But that's not the norm. Hebrews 11:35-39 describes what following God often STILL looks like in the 2/3's world, and it bears little resemblance to the cushy Christian Life we are enjoying in America today.
"Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, to that they might gain a better resurrection. Some faced jeers and flogging, while still others were chained and put in prison. They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword. They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated-- the world was not worthy of them. They wandered in deserts and mountains, and in caves and holes in the ground. These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised. God had planned something better for us so that only together with us would they be made perfect."
That doesn't sound like Prosperity was a big part of God's agenda for those heroes of the faith, but the general feel of THIS preaching is that material wealth-- Prosperity-- is the sign of God's favor. The proof that your priorities are right with God. And since God is no respecter of persons, if God gives conspicuous wealth to someone else, then he will do it for you too! You only have to follow these easy spiritual steps...
But if so, are the African villagers who sometimes walk hours each way to get to a church service out of the will of God because they don't own land, and likely never will? Is their relationship with God less intimate than ours? That must be so, because if they had followed the principals this man teaches from the bible, then they too would have Rolexes and Rolls-Royces and boats, and fly to speaking engagements on private jets, and own land-- right?
10:14 Matthew 6:24 "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Mammon."
Mammon is a term to describe the idolatry of material riches, but in the medieval period, some religious scholars started saying it was the NAME of a demonic spirit associated with the desire to accumulate wealth. This preacher teaches it that way, and I don't take issue with that. However, this becomes one of his key proof texts in the rest of the message, and I think he gets off track.
11:52 "Write down that 'Steps are repeatable.' Write down that 'What God does for one, He'll do for anyone.' So God is not a respecter of persons. Acts 10:34. What he does for somebody, He's going to do for anybody. So when you find out what somebody knows in an area, if you repeat those steps out of the same heart and motivation that they took those steps in, what God does for one person, He'll do for you... If God did this for them, then He can do if for me, because God is no respecter of persons."
This sounds great! If God gave this other guy a nice car and house and boat than he can do it for me. What he is implying is a classic IF/THEN statement. "IF I follow these principles, THEN God WILL do it for me, because it is part of God's character. "For God is no respecter of persons." Yes, God CAN do it for me, but that doesn't mean He will choose to do so, no matter how much I like nice things. This is one of his favorite proof texts. He quotes it again and again, except, this passage isn't about God giving material wealth at all! This is the story of the Gentile Cornelius coming to Peter. Up until this point, the believers thought that one MUST be Jewish to follow God, but God gave Peter the vision of the sheet filled with animals and told him to kill and eat. When Peter objected, God told him, "Do not call anything impure that God has made clean." God was showing Peter that now outsider Gentiles were IN. Accepted. Welcome. It had nothing to do with God giving us wealth. But he twists this passage to teach something it was never written about.
13:20 "In life, you're going to have to make a choice between serving God, and serving that spirit of Mammon..."
This is true. But then he equates not going to church on Sunday "Because you have to work" with the worship of Mammon. And it CAN be, if you work seven days a week. Lots of people have jobs that require them to work on Sundays. My pastor and my worship pastor, for example. And so they take another day off during the week as a Sabbath rest. In Mark 2:24-28, Jesus teaches that "the Sabbath is made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." It was a gift of rest, which God gave his people. If the principal is that serving God and having a job that requires you to work on Sundays are mutually exclusive, then tons of professions are off limits. Police, Firefighters, Military, Doctors, Teachers, Grocery Store employees, Gas Stations attendants, restaurant employees, etc. If this is the principal, then God's people are limited to professions like construction workers, who normally don't work on Sundays. But I believe God wants his children spread out in nearly every profession, to be salt and light.
Where he is actually going with his argument is the idea that if people are not going to church because they are WORKING, then they are not there at the church to give financially. That's his actual point. His argument isn't about the warning in Hebrews 10:25 "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some..." No, it's not that believers NEED to be in fellowship with other believers. His point is that offerings are not what they should be because people are worshiping Mammon by going to work on Sundays instead of being at church for the offering plate.
14:00 "Understanding Bible Prosperity allows you to put God in His rightful place (first) and Mammon in HIS rightful place. Which is nowhere near you! Because if I understand it in putting God first, all the other things are added unto me. The desires of my heart are given to me. I don't have to go to the world to get anything. I understand that my obedience to God will supply all my needs, not according to Mammon's riches, but according to God's tangible riches that are in Glory, that he has a way of getting to you."
Okay, Matthew 6:31-34 says,
"So do not worry, saying 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first the kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
And Psalm 37:4 says,
"Delight yourself in the LORD, and he will give you the desires of your heart."
He is making the argument that "If I put God first [with my money] (through tithes and offerings), then all the other things will be added to me (the prosperous Good Life) and the desires of my heart will be given to me." But that's not what those passages actually teach. In his sermon at my church, he emphatically declared that "God doesn't know how to give JUST Enough, God only know how to give MORE than Enough!" The actual context of Matthew 6:31-34 is the disciples not knowing where their next meal was coming from! Jesus was assuring them that God would provide. And his reference to not worrying about tomorrow was because they were in a season of God providing Just Enough for today. And then tomorrow, God would provide Just Enough all over again. And so we don't need to worry. Seek first the Kingdom, and all these things that your heavenly father knows you need will be added to you. As for Psalms 37:4, God fulfilling the desires of your heart is linked to delighting yourself in the Lord, not in putting God in his rightful place in your finances. It is possible to religiously tithe and give offerings purely out of obedience, with Delight in the Lord nowhere in the equation. It happens all the time. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees in Matthew 23:23 for tithing on the spices in their kitchen pantry, but ignoring the important stuff!
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not leave the other undone."
But this Preacher is teaching it backwards. Giving is one of the Love Languages. IF we truly delight ourselves in the Lord, then we WILL give to the ministry, not just in obedience, but out of love and genuine thankfulness. But he turns it into a Transaction. IF we put God in his rightful place financially (through giving) THEN we will get all these nice things. It's Giving to Get. When it's supposed to be giving because... well, because we love Him! And we can't help but give. Not because we have a spiritual Christmas list and are being good boys and girls and want to make sure we get everything on our list!
I am a father of three children. I delight in taking care of them, in doing things for them- such as surprising my daughter with her favorite ice cream, just to see the pleasure on her face when she opens the freezer and spies it. I do it because I love her and I WANT to take care of her. I DON'T do it because she cleaned the kitchen and her bedroom and did her chores exactly how I asked and in the right sequence. Because me taking care of her isn't a Transaction. She is not a boarder at my house. She is my daughter and I love her. When God does good things for us, it comes out of RELATIONSHIP with HIM! Not because we religiously followed a list of principles to the letter...
21:15 "I want you to notice something," [from John 12:1-11, the story of Mary pouring costly perfume on Jesus' feet. Judas objects, saying that perfume should have been sold and the money given to the poor.] "The spirit of Mammon hates for any Minister of the Gospel to receive personal honor, tangible honor, financial gifts, any kind..."
He makes the argument that Judas objected to this lavish gift giving because the spirit of Mammon didn't want Jesus to receive honor. But in reality, Judas didn't care much about whether Jesus was honored or not, as long as he had walking-around money. Verse 6 says "He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put in it." Judas wasn't objecting to Jesus receiving this honor out of principal. It was personal. He was looking out for Number One, and the method of this especially lavish gift giving of anointing his feet for burial meant the gift wasn't monetized first by selling it "so it could be given to the poor." Since it wasn't a cash gift, he had no opportunity to skim a little for himself.
22:45 "The spirit of Mammon is a spirit of Control and Financial Control... They don't want that minister to receive money. Look what it said. [verses 9-11] 'Now all the people are leaving us to go to Jesus.' "
In verse 9-11, it says that large crowds of Jews were coming to see Jesus and also to see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead.
"So the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well, for on account of him many of the Jews were going over to Jesus and putting their faith in him."
In the video, this preacher is suggesting that the priests were mad because Jesus was getting the crowds of people, and therefore the offerings. But here is his IMPLIED Argument: "IF the enemy doesn't want the preacher to get paid, THEN you OPPOSE the enemy by sending the preacher money." So sending money to the preacher is doing God's work, because you are opposing the spirit of Mammon. He regularly states in his sermons that he wants "to kick the devil in the teeth," and this is an emotional argument urging you to do so with your checkbook. And it's working for him. By the start of his fifth SpiteAThon broadcast, he had already raised $591K.
So here is my question to all the people sending him money: this is over and above what you give to your own church and your own church leaders, who minister to you every Sunday, right? Who pray for you by name, and come see you at your sick bed, and anonymously drop groceries off at your door when times are desperate? You ARE giving, and giving generously to your LOCAL church body that you are a part of, right? So that the leadership that GOD has placed over you to care for YOU is provided for, RIGHT? And only then do you send money to someone you have no connection with?
Having said that, if God uses an outsider in your life to speak to you, to move you, to impart truth to you, then BLESS THAT MAN. Be his blessing! But DON'T neglect the local people who minister to you...
He's right to say that the enemy doesn't want preachers to get paid, he just doesn't say WHY. The WHY, is because if preachers and Christian School teachers and others in full time Christian Ministry can't live reasonably well on what they are paid, then they often leave the ministry, and THAT is a victory for the enemy. The bible teaches VERY clearly in 1 Timothy 5:18, Luke 10:7, Deuteronomy 25:4, 2 Chronicles 31:4, 1 Corinthians 9:14 and multiple other places that workers in the ministry SHOULD be paid through the ministry. And that they should be paid well. As Got Questions Ministries puts it in https://www.gotquestions.org/the-laborer-is-worthy-of-his-hire.html ,
"In 1 Timothy 5:17, Paul explains further. 'The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.' A study of the term double honor reveals that it refers to both respect and remuneration. The phrase emphasizes generosity. Paul expects the church to provide reasonable pay for a job well done, and failure to do so indicates a shortage of respect and honor for one's spiritual leaders."
So, what does paid well look like? Good question. In my missionary school, they addressed this question by giving a general rule of thumb. "The preacher's lifestyle should be similar to that of his congregation." So if you live in a nice area and the church parking lot is filled with Lexus and Mercedes, than it would be appropriate for the pastor to drive one also. But if most of the congregation has to walk to church because they don't have cars, the preacher driving around in the Mercedes would lead to questions about whether he was getting rich on the ministry, and what is his motivation to be there in the first place? Is it all about the money? One Biblical example of God's eye on this sort of thing, can be found in 2 Kings 5.
The king of Aram sends his trusted general Naaman to the prophet Elisha, because Naaman's Hebrew slave girl tells him that Elisha could cure him of his leprosy. So he arrives, bearing rich gifts: 750 lbs of silver, 150 lbs of gold, and ten nice changes of clothes. Elisha refuses to see him and instead tells him to go and wash seven times in the river Jordan and he will be cleansed. He storms off, enraged, but gets persuaded by his servants to give it a go, and God heals him. He returns with his gifts. Elisha stoutly refuses the gifts and sends him home.
"After Naaman had traveled some distance, Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the man of God said to himself, 'My master was too easy on Naaman, this Aramean, by not excepting from him what he brought. As surely as the LORD lives, I will run after him and get something from him.' So Gehazi hurried after Naaman. When Naaman saw him running toward him, he got down from his chariot to meet him. 'Is everything all right?' he asked. 'Everything is all right,' Gehazi answered. 'My master sent me to say, "Two young men from the company of the prophets have just come to me from the hill country. Please five them a talent (about 75 lbs) of silver and two sets of clothing." '
'By all means, take two talents,' said Naaman. he urged Gehazi to accept them and then tied up the two talents of silver in two bags, with the two sets of clothing. He gave them to two of his servants who carried them ahead of Gehazi. When Gehazi came to the hill, he took the things from the servants and put them away in the house. He sent the men away, and they left. The he went in and stood before his master Elisha.
'Where have you been, Gehazi?' Elisha asked.
'Your servant didn't go anywhere,' Gehazi answered.
But Elisha said to him, 'Was not my spirit with you when the man got down from his chariot to meet you? Is this the time to take money, or accept clothes, olive groves, vineyards, flocks, herds, or menservants or maidservants? Naaman's leprosy will cling to you and your descendants forever.' Then Gehazi went from Elisha's presence and he was leprous, as white as snow."
(Incidentally, the same Preacher teaches both in his book on healing and in every sermon at my church that sickness ALWAYS and ONLY ever comes from the Devil. That God never puts sickness on people. The above passage proves that he is wrong about that also.)
So here we have Gehazi, someone in the ministry, using the Ministry to get himself conspicuous wealth far beyond what was appropriate for his position as servant to the prophet, and God noticed. Also, please note that Elisha steadfastly refused the rich gifts. He wouldn't take the money! But why? The Bible doesn't say why, but I think it is because it would have made it transactional. It would have turned it into a Fee-For-Service, when it was really God's GIFT to Naaman. See also Isaiah 22:15-19, where the palace steward Shebna was taking status and honors for himself (as opposed to money) and God removed him from his position. The story of Simon the Sorcerer in Acts 8:18-23 also comes to mind:
"When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles' hands, he offered them money and said, 'Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.'
Peter answered: 'May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part of share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord. Perhaps he will forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin.' "
In 1993, I was in missionary school on the Mercy Ship Anastasis, in West Africa. We had a guest speaker one day who got our attention by setting an aluminum pie plate on his podium. Then he reached into his wallet and pulled out five $20 bills, one by one. That was a lot of money then, and we were all beyond broke. He held them together in his hand, pulled out a lighter, and set them all on fire. There were audible gasps all around the room. "Oh my God!" somebody said. "EXACTLY!" was his immediate response. "God wants to kill you to money..."
I am not saying God wants us to be poor, by definition. Only that making us conspicuously wealthy is not normally on God's To-Do list. He gave Solomon extreme riches as a bonus, simply because he was pleased by the humility in his heart when God asked Solomon for what he desired. Instead of asking for riches or fame or honor, Solomon asked for Wisdom in ruling this great people. God was pleased with Solomon's heart, with his attitude, and so God richly blessed him and entrusted him with extreme riches.
But other times, God TRUSTS his servants with pain, suffering, and privation-- for his own purposes, as we read in Hebrews 11 above, rightfully called the Faith chapter. YES, God often blesses us materially, but there is often SUFFERING in involved in following Jesus. This man's gospel is all about the former, but none of the latter. It's all Moonlight and Roses but no Daylight and Dishes. Yet Paul writes in Romans 5:3-5:
"We rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame..."
There is more that could be said, but I think I have said enough for now. Another time perhaps...
Comments