May/June 2002

Does God Want Me to be Rich?

by Rusty Freeman

Does God want me to be rich -- to be prosperous? Some say yes. There are many of us who struggle with that answer, though. Jesus himself lived as a simple carpenter. Ray Stevens' song, "Would Jesus wear a Rolex on his television show?" makes us stop and think. Is it God's will for every Christian on earth to be upper or middleclass? What about all the Christians who live in places like India or some of the poor countries of Africa or Central America? I would agree, yes, God wants us to be rich, but rich in what sense?

When we look at the Old Testament, we see that the promise of riches and prosperity to the faithful was definitely a promise of material wealth. Proverbs 10:22 says, "The blessing of the Lord brings wealth." There are many scriptures such as Deuteronomy 28:1-5, 8, where the Israelites were told that if they were obedient, God would give them lots of material things. Land, buildings, herds, crops and cash were all a part of what God had in mind as part of his blessing for the Israelites.

Of course, God discouraged unrestrained greed. There were conditions and warnings:

· "Do not wear yourself out to get rich" (Proverbs 23:4).

· "A faithful man will be richly blessed, but one eager to get rich will not go unpunished" (Proverbs 28:20).

· "Better a poor man whose walk is blameless, than a rich man whose ways are perverse" (Proverbs 28:6).

Finally, in the Old Testament, we see those persons to whom the question of wealth seems out of place altogether. Was Elijah rich? Or Amos, or Jeremiah, or Jonah or Samuel? We really don't know the answer to that question. It's possible they all had healthy bank accounts somewhere. But the significance of the question seems to fade with these stalwart men of the Bible. Who cares? These are men rich in relationship with God the Almighty is what the Bible seems to be whispering.

When we come fully into the world of the New Testament, we find that a radical shift takes place. This is a shift that, if neglected, will get us into all sorts of unbiblical pitfalls because it is a purposeful, biblical change that was and is a part of the eternal purpose of God.

The shift has to do with the function of a large part of the Old Testament. The Bible specifically says that many things in the Old Testament were:

1) temporary and 2) pedagogical (they had a teaching purpose). Almost all things physical in the Old Testament were put there to teach about some eternal, spiritual thing.

Hebrews 8-10 is full of this kind of language, describing the temple, its furniture and its associated acts of worship as "copies" and "shadows" (8:5, 9:24 and 10:1) of the true temple of heaven (8:2, 9:11 and 9:24). Hebrews 9:8-10 explains the temporary nature of these things.

If we think about it, we realize that at least subconsciously we already know this. We sing about entering into the Promised Land, knowing that we are talking about heaven. We understand that the incense of the temple represents the prayers of the people. The city of Babylon is humanity organized apart from God. Real Old Testament battles teach us about spiritual warfare.

The important point to our study is that as the real spiritual truth is revealed, the temporary teaching object takes on less importance.

A simple way to visualize this is to think of the children's object lesson that many churches have. The children are called to the front of the sanctuary and the adult presenter pulls out a lamp with the cord dangling. The presenter tries to turn on the light but nothing happens. The children shout out, "You must plug it in first!" The adult does so, then proceeds to talk about how we need to be spiritually plugged into God's Spirit or we will have no power in our Christian lives.

As the shift takes place to the spiritual truth that is trying to be conveyed, the object of the lamp takes on less and less importance. In fact, if the kids really get the point, it is no longer necessary. It can be laid aside.

Many modern people misunderstand that the physical/financial blessing of the Israelites should join the other things on our list in that category. The material wealth of the Jews was an object lesson pointing to the spiritual reality of the spiritual riches that are readily available to every believer in Christ.

When we look at the New Testament, we find not one mention of material wealth as a sign of God's blessing, even though the Old Testament was replete with that kind of talk. Instead, we find riches being spoken of in a whole new context:

· "I know your afflictions and your poverty -- yet you are rich!" (Revelation 2:9).

· "For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich" (2 Corinthians 8:9).

· "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding" (Ephesians 1:7).

· "The riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints" (Ephesians 1:18).

· "Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him?" (James 2:5).

Here we find that "riches" never has to do with material goods, but with the spiritual blessings of being a part of the Kingdom of God.

Furthermore, the New Testament sounds the alarm that physical wealth can, in fact, draw us away from the spiritual riches of Christ. Jesus told the rich young ruler to sell his possessions and give to the poor. When the young man left, ignoring Jesus' advice, Jesus declared, "It is hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God" (Matthew 19:23).

Does God want me to be rich? I will again say yes -- but not in material goods. Whatever our material status, God wants us to be rich in good deeds, rich in faith and rich in all the glories of the grace of God as shown in his Son, Jesus Christ! 

Rusty Freeman is a church pastor in Johnstown, Ohio.

Words About Word-Faith Is it true that all Christians should be healthy and wealthy? Is it true that all Christians should be healthy and wealthy? If you continue to be sick after asking God to heal you, are you guilty of a secret sin? Is God obligated to automatically answer prayers, if we say the right words and pray a prayer of positive confession? The Word-Faith movement, often referred to by its critics as the gospel of health and wealth, enjoying special allegiance among charismatics and Pentecostals, would say "yes" to all these questions. The ongoing, heated debate about contemporary Word-Faith teaching goes back to 1979, when Charles Farah, a professor at Oral Roberts University (ORU) published From the Pinnacle of the Temple. Farah applied his title from the temptation hurled at Jesus by the devil (Matthew 4:5) to what he contended were reckless, biblically unfounded teachings about God's promises of physical healing. In 1982 one of Farah's students at ORU, D.R. McConnell, attributed the origin of Word-Faith teaching to the metaphysical teaching of E.W. Kenyon in his master's thesis. McConnell's thesis was then published in 1988 and again in 1995 as A Different Gospel. McConnell, offering penetrating historical analysis, claims that noted Pentecostal Kenneth Hagin (called Dad Hagin by his followers) borrowed his Word-Faith teachings from the mind-science of E.W. Kenyon McConnell notes, "The Faith gospel is a message ideally suited to the twentieth-century American Christian. In an age in America characterized by complexity, the Faith gospel gives simple, if not revelational, answers. In an economy fueled by materialism and fired by the ambitions of the 'upwardly mobile,' the Faith gospel preaches wealth and prosperity. The Faith gospel promises health and long life to a world in which death can come a myriad of different ways. Finally, in an international environment characterized by anarchy, in which terrorists strike at will and nuclear holocaust can come screaming from the sky at any moment, the Faith gospel confers an authority with which the believer can supposedly exercise complete control over his or her own environment." Others followed McConnell, but none so convincing or popular as Hank Hanegraaff in his 1993 book, Christianity in Crisis. Hanegraaff agrees with McConnell (writing the foreword in the updated, 1995 version of A Different Gospel), calling the Word-Faith movement a "systematic subversion of the historic Christian faith." Christianity in Crisis offers documentation of the teachings of Word-Faith preachers as well as biblical and doctrinal analysis, warning that "multitudes are being duped by a gospel of greed and are embracing doctrines straight from the metaphysical cults." Hanegraaff notes that "twisted texts, make-believe miracles, and counterfeit Christs are common denominators of the Faith movement's cast of characters, with major roles played by Essek William Kenyon, Kenneth E. Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, Frederick K.C. Price, John Avanzini, Robert Tilton, Marilyn Hickey, Paul Yonggi Cho (David Cho), Charles Capps, Jerry Savelle, Morris Cerullo and Paul Crouch." Robert M. Bowman, in The Word-Faith Controversy (2001) attempts what he perceives as a balanced and fair critique of the Word-Faith debate. Bowman attempts to distinguish acceptable Pentecostal faith and belief from distorted teaching, trying, in his words, "to move the debate forward in a more constructive manner," saying that "my goal in this book is to model a biblical balance of tough-minded forthrightness about the Word-Faith teaching and tenderhearted concern and respect toward the people in the Word-Faith movement." Like McConnell and Hanegraaff before him, Bowman also carefully examines the many unbiblical teachings of the Word-Faith movement. Bowman believes that the Word-Faith movement has had negative consequences, offering ten considerations: 1) Division in the church, 2) Self-centered spirituality, 3) Acceptance of false prophecies, 4) General lack of discernment, 5) Anti-intellectualism, 6) Spiritual and doctrinal error and elitism, 7) Discouragement of Christians' faith, 8) Testimonies of people dying due to the Word-Faith error, 9) Diversion of Christians from sound teaching and growth, and 10) Unnecessary embarrassment to the church. Bowman struggles, wanting to avoid hyperbole, giving an even-handed assessment of Word-Faith. While not denying the influence of meta-physical thought, Bowman documents parallels between Christian Science and early faith-healing preaching and practice, but asserts that the true origins of Word-Faith teaching lie in the evangelical faith-cure movement of the late nineteenth century (for more, see "The Road to Wellville" on Page 34). Finally, Bowman concludes that: 1) none of the Word-Faith teachers explicitly rejects orthodox doctrine, 2) the Word-Faith teachers at times affirm orthodox doctrine, 3) the Word-Faith movement is a radical wing of an orthodox tradition, 4) the Word-Faith movement teaches patently unbiblical ideas about the nature of God, the nature of human beings and the person and redemptive work of Jesus Christ, 5) some of the Word-Faith teachers have espoused blatantly heretical and blasphemous ideas, and 6) the Word-Faith teaching is detrimental to a sound Christian life.  -- the Editors

ENRON and the Church I wonder if Kenneth Lay goes to church. I read about scandal-ridden Enron Corporation and its former chairman, but I have yet to see mention of church affiliation. I have read about his assiduous cultivating of politicians, his extravagant lifestyle, his obfuscation of Enron's real dealings, his strategy to avoid taxes, his double-dealing with employees-urging them to continue buying Enron stock, even as he unloaded his own-but nothing about church. Powerful people do belong to churches, synagogues and mosques, and many, no doubt, consider themselves people of faith. Some belong to those congregations that cater to the powerful and shape the Word to their liking, never challenging large givers, always soothing, always protecting the wall between Sunday and Monday. In preaching that tends to be "heavily pietistic," awkward connections between justice and gospel, between larger needs and personal needs, are "air-brushed out," says one observer in Houston, Lay's hometown. Some powerful people draw closer to the fire and worship with everyday believers. Some build Habitat houses, serve food at shelters, teach Sunday School, rather than serve on finance committees, and risk compromising their single-minded drive to success. But anyone who dares enter a house of God and pays the slightest attention will eventually hear a discomfiting word. It doesn't take a firebrand in the pulpit. "Give us this day our daily bread," for example, talks of bread, not Porsches, and receiving from God, not seizing through self-will. "Lord, have mercy," names God as a giver of compassion, not compensation. "The Lord is my shepherd," points to humble, not lofty. Even if they worship in a house of self-praise, where Sunday is a fashion show and networking op, they must see that the hands they hold up to God are empty until God fills them. Why, then, does so little of this take hold? Our nation awards billions in tax benefits to religious communities. We hire chaplains for Congress and protect church from state. Why, then, is venality so common? Why aren't we surprised that Kenneth Lay and his chums at Arthur Andersen thought they could buy favors? Why does greed run rampant? If people listened on Sunday, how could they be so callous and self-serving on Monday? It is, of course, an ancient dilemma. The relentless march of human sin is rarely impeded by anything other than pride's own tendency to implode. Enron collapsed under its own corrupt weight, not because of anything a preacher said or because "lead us not into temptation" suddenly made sense. But, still, why? If the Word of God is so powerful, so true, so filled with light and life, why does it have so little apparent impact on our behavior? It might be that the faith enterprise comes up short. Maybe we haven't yet found the right combination of music, liturgy, training and polity. Maybe we need to tweak our institutions a bit more. More likely, the faith enterprise needs to come up the mountain and sit with God. Instead of inviting Jesus into our homes and hearts-our comfort zones-we need to leave home and follow him. Instead of gathering with the like-minded on Sunday to hear excellent words that we critique in the buffet line, we need to sit on a hillside of God's choosing and listen to God speak. We need to know that the first Beatitude-"Blessed are the poor in spirit"-wasn't a call to be nice to the less fortunate. It was a description of reality. Until we are broken, God cannot mend. Until we suffer, God cannot heal. Until we gag on food of our own making, God cannot feed us. Until we exhaust our own resources, we cannot understand the very prayers we recite. Kenneth Lay, I am told, has indeed been an elder and regular worshipper at one of Houston's power churches. Now that his world has collapsed, I wonder if pastel words will continue to soothe. Or will he now need something with more bite, like the desperate prayers across town where the pensioners whose savings he squandered cry out for bread and hope?  2002 Religion News Service --Tom Ehrich

Return to Plain Truth Ministries Home Page