Was Jesus Wealthy? - Part 2

In a previous post, I dealt with some of the ideas put forth by prosperity preachers that Jesus was, in fact, a wealthy man. The impetus for these posts comes from an article at CNN.com that you can find here.

Biblical and historical ignorance are on full display every time one of these Ministers of Materialism opens his or her mouth. There was so much I wanted to cover, I decided to split it up into 2 posts.

The argument for Jesus’ affluence continues:

[The Rev. C. Thomas] Anderson says Jesus never would have had disciples or a large following if he was poor. He would not have been able to command their respect.
"The poor will follow the rich, the rich will follow the rich, but the rich will never follow the poor," Anderson says.

But, what about Martin Luther King? And Mahatma Gandhi (who wore a diaper)? The article points out that they amassed quite a following without being paragons of opulence.

The Scriptural record is clear that the people followed Jesus because of the healing and the teaching. He taught things the religious establishment of that day did not. He offered hope in the form of reconciliation with God – something they cherished back then, and that seems to be lost on society today.

But this assertion points to a more troubling problem I have with the prosperity movement: the idea that we must ascend to greatness (i.e. material wealth) in order to be effectively used by God. This betrays a worldly and covetous heart, and it flies in the face of Biblical truth:

1Co 1:26-29 NIV Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. (27) But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. (28) He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things--and the things that are not--to nullify the things that are, (29) so that no one may boast before him.

I pray that the peddlers of prosperity would spend less time feeding their flesh, and more time meditating on the Word of God.

Was Jesus Rich?

The prosperity preachers are really reaching in order to justify their religion of opulence. For years they’ve been spouting the nonsense that, contrary to centuries of understanding, Jesus was a materially wealthy man.

You see, they have to assert this falsehood in order to legitimize their own right to wealth (after all, they are the King’s Kids). This affluence is also available to their followers, who are willing to plant a fully deductible faith-seed into their ministry.

This article from CNN.com does a good job presenting both sides of the argument that Jesus was wealthy. Here are some quotes:

[Rev. C. Thomas] Anderson says Jesus couldn't have been poor because he received lucrative gifts -- gold, frankincense and myrrh -- at birth. Jesus had to be wealthy because the Roman soldiers who crucified him gambled for his expensive undergarments. Even Jesus' parents, Mary and Joseph, lived and traveled in style, he says. "Mary and Joseph took a Cadillac to get to Bethlehem because the finest transportation of their day was a donkey," says Anderson.

This is an example of blatant biblical ignorance coming from a supposed Man of God. Even a cursory glance at scripture will show that there is no mention of Mary and Joseph taking a donkey on their journey. That’s just the stuff of legend used to fill out a nativity scene at Christmas time.

Also, regarding the gold, frankincense, and myrrh, it’s widely agreed that these “lucrative gifts” were used to finance their trip to Egypt (remember that – fleeing from the murderous King Herod?). Presumably, Joseph had no carpenter clients in that area, so they would have used the gifts to live on during that time.

As for the soldiers gambling for His clothing? Records from that era show that this was a typical practice. Roman soldiers routinely gambled for any intact garment of a crucifixion victim. What wasn’t typical, though, was the crucifixion of the wealthy. This torturous death was reserved for the despised slaves and rebels.

More on this in the next post.

Selling Jesus

Here’s an interesting article about one of my pet peeves: Christian Marketing. Ever since I saw “Testamints” (breath mints with Bible verses on them) at my local Christian retailer, I’ve been cynical about the selling of what church marketing consultant Brad Abare calls “Jesus Junk”.

In this article, Abare nails it:

"We think it's just dumb. It's not a true reflection of creativity," said Abare, of the nonprofit Center for Church Communication in Los Angeles.

He’s speaking specifically about the current t-shirt trend where widely recognized logos such as Subway, iPod, American Idol, and Coca Cola are altered to contain, upon closer inspection, Christian themes.

“Reese’s” becomes “Jesus”.
“American Idol” becomes “Amazing Grace”.
“Sprite” becomes “Spirit”.

Some are going beyond the creativity criticism and questioning the copyright infringement. Aren’t these clever religious marketers violating the eighth commandment – thou shalt not steal?

My main concern is that these cheesy, banal rip offs will cheapen the message of Scripture. How are we to take seriously the idea of a loving God giving his only Son as a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins against His holiness, when we see Him referred to as “My Homeboy”?

Salvation by Chicken Wings and Napping

Last week, ABC's Nightline aired a debate on the existence of Satan - and all the things that go along with that. Arguing for the Biblical position of the existence of the devil were Mark Driscoll (pastor of Mars Hill Church in Seattle) and Annie Lobert (former prostitute and founder of Hookers for Jesus - not what it sounds like).

Arguing against the existence of Satan were Deepak Chopra (New-Age author of many popular books who dresses like a classic James Bond villain) and Bishop Carlton Pearson (former evangelical demon-caster-outer).

Here's a short YouTube clip:



One of the best lines came when Mark Driscoll said (as only Driscoll can say) that if people would have made up a religion and voted on it, they would have come up with something like a "salvation by eating chicken wings and napping". At least he said that is what he would have voted for.

You can watch the entire debate by clicking here. Scroll down and click on the video labeled "Driscoll Slams Pearson's Religious History" to see a great exchange.

Holy Cheetos! People are seeing Jesus everywhere!

Okay, so what are we to do with this?

We could be skeptical: That was about as legit as a Fred Phelps smile.
We could wax sarcastic: Wow! I just saw Jesus in a liberal church! What're the odds? Never seen that before . . .
We could be really spiritual: Yes, but do others see Jesus in yooouuu?

What do you do with this?

All Bound-up by Religion?

That's easy to understand. The word religion is connected to the Latin word religare which means to bind fast, or tie up. It later came to mean to place an obligation on. What's that tell ya?

Just remember, Christianity is not a religion - it's a relationship. Binding up is the exact opposite of what God wanted to accomplish through Jesus' sacrificial death and resurrection. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for burdening the people with religion (Matthew 23:2-4), and referred to his requirements as easy and light.

Matthew 11:30 NIV
(30) . . . my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

The Missing Question

There are lots of questions in life:
Commercial Questions
“Can you hear me now?”
Clichéd Questions
“Is this thing on?”
Silver Screen Questions
“Dude, Where’s My Car?”
Musical Questions
“Do You Know the Way to San Jose?”
Theological Questions
“Did Adam and Eve have belly-buttons?”

But, as important as these questions are, there is an even more important question that is missing from our society. This missing question was articulated by those who heard Peter’s sermon in Acts:

Acts 2:37 NIV
(37) When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?"

These men were asking, "What shall we do to be reconciled with God?" They were filled with a holy dread at the recognition that they had offended the almighty God, and they wanted to know what they needed to do to make it right.

Do people ask this question today? Are we as a society at all driven to do anything we can to be reconciled to God?

Color me cynical, but I see an alarming apathy towards God.

Apathy vs. Atheism
Atheism, the belief that there is no God, has gained ground lately. There is currently a world-wide campaign being conducted called the Blasphemy challenge. People from all over the globe post written and video blogs all intended to disparage the Christian God.

Atheism says there is no God, and you can posit rational arguments that challenge an intellectually-honest atheist. But what do you do with the person who acknowledges that there is a God . . . but they don't care?

Where does this apathy come from?

It all begins with the preacher
Romans 10:14 NIV
(14) How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?

The integrity of the message lies in the effectiveness of the preacher. I believe, by and large, that the apathetic attitude towards God so prevalent in our culture stems from the humanistic preaching found in pulpits across America. This man-centered gospel has created a generation that no longer asks, "What must I do?" but rather, "What can I get?"

The net result is that we have a generation seeking the fulfillment of their flesh, not restoration with God.

This prosperity gospel creates a perverse relationship in which God is relegated to the position of a kind, old benefactor whose only purpose is to continually access His limitless resources in order to bail out his beloved. This approach to the gospel threatens to turn the Bride of Christ into Anna Nicole Smith!

Repentance Preaching
Notice the kind of preaching from Peter that prompted this question. He wasn’t afraid to place the burden of blame on the people:

Acts 2:22-37 NLT
(22) "People of Israel, listen! God publicly endorsed Jesus the Nazarene by doing powerful miracles, wonders, and signs through Him, as you well know.
(23) But . . . you nailed Him to a cross and killed Him.
(36) "So let everyone in Israel know for certain that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, to be both Lord and Messiah!"
(37) Peter's words pierced their hearts, and they said to him and to the other apostles, "Brothers, what should we do?"

Too much preaching today seeks to pacify the listeners and make them feel comfortable. Repentance preaching emphasizes man’s innate sinfulness and subsequent separation from God. Then the love of God is fully demonstrated in His sacrifice to redeem us.
You cannot fully appreciate the God’s love without first understanding the sinfulness of man. Because of that, an honest assessment of the human condition must precede every presentation of the salvation message. It is much more powerful to realize that Christ died for us while we were yet sinners. (Romans 5:8).