The Prosperity Gospel Considered by Solomon

I haven't really be giving a pulpit report from my preaching because I have been writing a book on the subject of Ecclesiastes but one thought that struck me about today's sermon on chapter 5:10-20 was how it stood in stark contrast to the prosperity gospel. It was actually a thought that came to me after I had finished speaking but there are several points I think Solomon would make to the prosperity preachers that would make their view look foolish:

1. That those who love abundance and the increase of wealth are engaged in vanity
2. When goods increase, those who consume them increase
3. That a good night's sleep is better than riches.
4. Riches can be horded to a person's hurt.
5. In the end we come into this world naked and we will return the same so the accumulation of anything is chasing after the wind.
6. The good and fitting thing is to be joyful over what God has given you regardless of economic status and to enjoy it in peace.

I guess I would believe the prosperity gospel more, if there were not so many warnings about becoming rich and setting your heart on riches IN SCRIPTURE. In this case Solomon warns that setting one's heart of riches robs you of the ultimate prosperity -- love, joy and peace. You can be rich and have these things but if riches steal them, then better not to be rich.

As a minister I find the prosperity gospel to be more the product of the current materialism of the Western World than an honest consideration of Scripture. The prosperity gospel gives Christians a justification to acquire and hoard goods in the name of Christ. Some of the fruit I have seen is old ladies giving up their social security checks to these preachers (the majority of funding for these guys and gals comes from this source), people buying things on credit believing God will supply the funds to pay for them and stinginess to the local church because the minister wouldn't preach this false gospel (no lie, I had one couple tell me that if I didn't start preaching it they would stop tithing). These false teaches seem to be doing well these days but I think many of their followers put themselves in a position of real poverty to support them. I find the whole lot of these preachers a little distasteful.

Solomon at least recognized, despite his great riches (think Bill Gates on steroids), that that was not what gave life meaning or significance. It was the ability to enjoy God's gifts in peace of heart and mind. That is something you can take with you through death to Christ's side.

Sexuality, the Church and America -- Part 2 -- Pornography

I originally was going to talk about the issue of homosexual marriage as part two but the issue of pornography and public nudity have a link that needs to be considered. The issue involves the definition of pornography and what changes would be made to that definition if women are allowed to show their breasts in public. Suppose in ten years ladies of the 'topfree' movement have won a national decision that allows them to be 'topfree' in any public places a man can. What then happen to all the pictures involving women with exposed breasts? Are they still considered porn? Probably not. What that means is that certain covers of magazines would change. For example (once again I am not trying to freak anyone out with this picture but I need a real life illustration to make my point), here is a cover from Maxim magazine:

This cover is indicative of a lot of men's magazines that do not necessarily contain naked pictures but if 'topfreedom' is achieved this lady would be allowed to drop her arm and hand without fear of prosecution for the magizine. Now, I pass the magazine racks everyday at my job and when I shop as well and so do a lot of other people. If women can be 'topfree' in public, then the covers of magazines would then be allowed to do the same. The issue I have is suddenly being forced to explain to children what is going on and why that women can show her breasts now and what are they? If I was a parent of small children and did not want my child to be exposed to this kind of thing, I would be out of luck. The store could say: "no shirt, no shoes no service" but I still have to go by the magazine rack where breasts would be visible.

Another issue would be Internet porn. What I mean is suppose you are using a filter of a secular nature and the filter does not allow you to filter out exposed female breasts because of the changes in the law. Your kid could be doing a report on some famous female celebrity and wham there is a picture of that celeb with herself exposed. Happens a lot these days.

That then brings up the question of then what does constitute pornography -- pictures of sexual genitalia and sexual acts only? This leaves a lot of wiggle room for a lot of other things because you dealing with the fine line of when exactly does an image become sexually explicit. That line would be even finer and more difficult to see.

The Church has never dealt with this issue well to begin with and this would make it even worse. Gentlemen we are going to have to live in a world when the sexually suggestive poses are going to be less suggestive and more overt and this going to mean a necessary change in the way we deal with this temptation. Ladies understand that your competition level for your husband's or boyfriend's attention will become more difficult. The 'topfreedom' movement may have a few good points, but I don't know if they see all the ramifications of their actions should they succeed. Pornography would be one issue that will certainly be affected.

Christians need to be ready for this change and not get overly bent out of shape about it, but take action that shields ourselves from the temptations that will be associated with these possible changes. I don't think we can stop this from happening in the very near future and the plan need to be one not of protest but one of reaching people (despite their ethical differences with us) for Christ with the life changing gospel.

IMHO

Next: Homosexual Marriage ( I mean it this time)

The Book of Revelation -- Is it really what we think it is?

My thoughts on the book of Revelation have always been cloudy and the only thing I think John Calvin did that was truly smart was he never wrote a commentary on it. Perhaps a lesson to the rest of us, but here I go making a series of posts on the subject of Revelation. I remember sitting in Sunday School as a teen when they taught about the end times (eschatology is the technical term) and asking the question of -- what if everyone is wrong? It is not an inconceivable option and as I went through my education I realized a few things:

1. The doctrine of the Rapture as most evangelicals have come to know it has only been around since the 19th century.

2. The doctrine of the Great Tribulation hinges on a single passage in Daniel that could be interpreted as fulfilled already in the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. See Daniel 9:24-27 for details.

3. The seven year tribulation timeline that is superimposed on the book of Revelation has its origins in both western thoughts of time and is only a recent phenom as it also has its origins in the 19th century.

4. "Seven" is put against many things in Revelation -- horns, trumpets, vials, seals, etc. One thing it is not put against is 'years'. Yep, for all the talk about a seven year tribulation, there is never a time in the Bible where the concept of a seven year time period and a great tribulation are linked.

5. Now, I also have different ideas on how the God of the Bible relates to time (aka as open theism) and I am wondering how that might affect my interpretation of the book of Revelation? I also wonder if all I had was the book of Revelation, how would I interpret it without referencing other books of the Bible?

So discarding the one wise thing John Calvin did (hey, I have already discarded everything else he did, so I might as well throw the last thing out), here I go into the wonderful world of Revelation and the great effort in this series, which may take a quite a while, is to let the book speak for itself. Onward and Upward.

Church Antagonism -- Part 5 -- Dealing with Antagonism

There are a few prelims to deal with in antagonistic situations. The biggest thing to remember is to make sure your dealing with an antagonistic situation. Conflict is normal in a church and if handled in a healthy manner can be constructive. Antagonism has two factors to look for. 1) A Person or persons who no matter what compromise is reached it is never enough. 2) Intense feelings that result only in anger and frustration.

One final thought -- remember some antagonists really, really believe they are doing the right thing, so communications may be very difficult. Antagonists do not want to reason or debate a point, they want to dominate and force their will on everyone else.

Steps in dealing with an antagonistic situation or person:

1. Pray -- you are engaging in spiritual warfare here. If you do not pray, you will be sucked up in the emotions of the situation instead of deal with it effectively. Pray and keep praying.

2. Confront them with the truth of the Word. Confrontation is difficult enough when it is opinion verses opinion, so make sure the Biblical question is addressed. If the antagonist has used gossip -- give evidence of it and point out verses that deal with that, etc.. Deal with everything and lay it on the line with the Bible.

3. If they refuse to listen, then take it to the board of the church. If it is the board that is the problem, then you might want to talk to the pastor and let him know he is not alone. Make a plan to talk to people and bring some people that agree with you to confront the person again with the problem.

4. If they fail to listen take it to the next meeting of the congregation. If it is only once a year, then call for one. If you are the pastor, do this. Don't be afraid but deal with it. If you are a member, find out how to call a church meeting and do so. Bring the matter up in the same way as before before the church. If the people still don't listen, move for their removal from the church. Even if you are not successful, a message will be sent. If you are successful, you will be surprise how much burden will lift off everyone in the church and the antagonists involved will get a wake up call.

If you are in leadership, stand your ground
If you are not in leadership, keep the support up and do something constructive. The biggest thing people can do is not gossip about the thing and confront gossip when you hear it.

Antagonists in power will of course fight this and may succeed in defeating you, but if that is the case then you will know one thing for sure -- the situation has been dealt with with one final step.

5. Contact denominational leadership, if you have any. If they do not help ( a situation that happens more and more these days-- I will deal with this in a later post) then you need to make some gut level decisions on your place in the church and whether to stay and continue to fight or leave.

One way or another, the situation will be dealt with and you will have some sense of resolution of the future. Hopefully the antagonists are gone (yes, this is a good thing), although you may have to deal with the gossip they spread after they leave. Don't hold out any illusions they will change until after they leave. If they haven't left, well you have decisions to make. Round Two or the Door. One note, if you are supporting the pastor and he has decided to stay -- stick with him. If he has decided to leave, stay with him to the last day.

Next: Recovering from Antagonism -- The Minister and His Family

Sexuality, the Church and America -- Part 1 -- Public Nudity

This is a new series based on some observations I made a week ago about the future of sexual morality in America. In this post, I want to look more fully at the issue of public nudity. The backdrop of this is my series Nudity, Modesty and Culture (If you haven't read it, do so and then come back) where I deal with the following related topics on this issue:

1. That nudity from a Biblical point of view consists of what the apron area of a persons body.
2. The idea of nakedness and women's breasts is never connected in Scripture.
3. Modesty Biblically is supposed to be a matter heart and spirit but the church often makes it a matter of dress and covering up.
4. In the end, modesty is culturally defined.

Which leads us to the culture war between Christians and the secular world of the USA about public nudity. There are significant things to consider here as I look at the news and issues coming up very soon.

1. Several women's groups, lead by the Topfree Equal Rights Association (TERA) are advocating equal rights for women to go topless (topfree) in the same places men can -- You can go to their web site but understand they have many pictures of 'topfree' women so if this bothers you don't go. A good chunk of the main supporters are women who breastfeed which have increased TERA's membership in number since the whole Facebook breastfeeding fiasco. There are also a growing number of women who simply see this as a constitutional issue. The argument leveled is that if a man can appear in public without a shirt a women should also be allowed to do so as well. They see this as a question of equal rights under law. The inequality being that a man is only considered naked if he exposes his genitals but a women is also considered indecent if she shows her nipples (by the way this is why a woman can show every part of her breast on those magizine covers as long as she covers her nipples). They further argue that in reality women's breasts do not constitute actual nudity as they really don't have a sexual function but a nurturing one.
2. There of course are many nudist organizations which I will not chronicle but suffice it to say they do not see nudity as a problem but maintain that a person should be allowed to dress or undress as they see fit.
3. Currently there are six states that allow some form of topfree rights for women and two others engaged in legal battles over the issue -- in every case the women have won and I predict they will continue to do so. It also should be noted that in many local areas there are topfree rights already in place by local ordinance and these are changing in favor of the women as well. Bourbon Street in New Orleans has been this way for many years but now they are definitely not alone. Ladies you may already have 'topfree rights' where you live and not know it.

How the Christian culture responds to these things is typical. There is a cry of outrage followed by a blaming society for the moral slippery slope. The self righteous judgment game follows where we all feel better about ourselves and our righteousness by looking down on those that engage in these practices. I would have to say this is not effective. A few observations:

1. Lust as a problem does not exist in these women or nudists -- it is a problem of each individual human heart. If the whole world dressed like the Amish, lust would still exist.
2. Self righteousness never wins a culture war.
3. If people are forced to live a certain way they will resent it, but righteousness that is engaged freely as Christianity is designed to do is a powerful thing.
4. In making a Biblical argument against these things we are going to be hamstrung by a couple things -- One, there is no way to make an argument that Women's breasts constitute nudity and so to get on the Bible here is difficult (shocking but true). Two, this IS a constitutional issue in this country and not a Biblical one and the fact is equality would dictate that either women should be allowed to go topfree, or men are going to have to be covered up (No more shirts and skins basketball guys)
5. Full nudity is something that people still have trouble with that are not Christians so the fight is going to be long here anyway because both sexes are required to cover up the angle of equal rights cannot be used.

My prediction is that the women who are advocating Topfree Rights will eventually win them on a nationwide scale and probably before the next ten years are out. Like when women began to show more leg and the public had a fit along with the moral majority the reaction will be same and then familiarity will come to a point that people will not notice anymore. In fact there may be a time when a women walks into a church with a bare chest and nobody will think anything of it. Sorry, it may happen because women walk in with short skirts now and nobody notices, well accept those people with lust in their hearts or self-righteousness.

This of course assumes we continue to go on the same path we have been going and when it comes to sexual morality and right now there does not seem to be a cultural reason to change course.

IMHO

Next: Pornography

Church Antagonism -- Part 4 -- What Allows Antagonists to Thrive

Church antagonists would never get away with anything if they did not act in a atmosphere that allows them to thrive. There are basically two factors involved:

1. Apathetic Bystanders: This can be anyone who would have the influence or could act at least in some way to confront the antagonism or stand up against it. The truth is that antagonists only survive because people do not stand up to it. They feel they are not in a position to stop it or are not sure what they should do. In my own ministry, my greatest problem was not the antagonists but the people who supported me that said and did nothing to stop it. Most are acting on the misguided notion that to be loving Christians they should get involved but real love sacrifices and stands up to evil. Remember it is often the pastor who is getting pummeled here and it is not loving to him or his family to just let him get pummeled. When good people do nothing, evil prospers. In my case it felt like it was me against half of the church with the other half watching the action -- not good.

2. Ineffective Denominational Officials: Boy do I know this one well. The fact is most denominational officials who could come in help the pastor and/or congregational leaders in trouble but they have a few things that make them ineffective: a) no plan -- and they follow it to the end. When you don't have a plan or procedure of how to handle these things you cause the 'bad' guys to have the advantage. b) lack of information on the situation -- ignorance of what is going on and being to lazy to find out what is really going on. If you are going into a bad situation get all the facts before you act. c) Lack of pastoral support: Pastors need support in this and they often don't get it. To tell someone under the gun to just pray about it or buck up smacks of -- 'be warmed and filled' but not doing anything needful.

If you get people fighting for their church and denominational officials who actually can help the situation looks a lot brighter.

Next: How to Act in the Face of Antagonism

Christians and Sexuality: Where is the USA Headed Morally?

As I look at the United States moral issues involving a sexual nature have always been forefront in the secular and Christian culture wars, I see some interesting things on the immediate horizon:

1. Public Nudity: Particularly the fight by women to have equal rights as men to be bare chested in public. The whole breastfeeding thing on Facebook and the current court cases in the last few years indicate that things are changing quickly. Currently there are six states which have 'topfree' laws of a various nature: California, Hawaii, Maine, New York (where a woman can now go topfree in any place a man can), Ohio and Texas. Other states are currently embroiled in battle about this: Pennsylvania and New Jersey come to mind. In many cases local communities define the laws here but in many cases these local laws are changing. It's like I said in my series on Nudity, Morality and Culture, it is something we as Christians are going to have to get used to seeing more and more. Literally.

2. Homosexual Marriage: I do not think this is going to leave the issue of States rights for a while but who will control it is debatable. I hat e to says this we are going to lose in the end and my own issue on this is that I retain as a minister to both not perform or acknowledge homosexual marriage. Just like I feel about common law marriage, neither the church or any minister should have to be forced perform or acknowledge such marriages if they choose not to.

3. Friends with Fringe Benefits: How common is this now and the one thing no Christian is saying is an intelligent response to casual sex. We decry it and we speak against it but this is not a response that people are going to accept. This is largely a continued failure to deal with the results of the sexual revolution.

4. Pornography: Has anyone else notice how common porn has become and it is not the world who has the problem that concerns me, but it is the number of church people caught in it. In fact we seem to have more problems with addiction to porn than anyone else -- I think in large part it is the poor way we sexually educate youth in the church that is the problem.

There are many others but these are the one that seem in front right now. What do you think?