-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
R
I said: What I am against is when people using them like you did.
What I meant to say is I am against when, in a discussion, one uses his/her seminary or bible college background in the matter that you did. But that's a none issue right now and irrelevant to this discussion. You do not need to respond to this unless it's about the topic.
What I meant to say is I am against when, in a discussion, one uses his/her seminary or bible college background in the matter that you did. But that's a none issue right now and irrelevant to this discussion. You do not need to respond to this unless it's about the topic.
A
I did!!! But since you obvioiusly didn't read the link, I'll copy and paste it then
In the history of the prosperity movement, Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland[17], and Frederick K. C. Price were among the founding teachers. Beyond just promoting materialism generally, critics also claim that the doctrine is used by its proponents to become wealthy and to finance their lavish lifestyles at the expense of donors.
While most -- if not all -- prosperity teachers believe in Word of Faith theology, the terms should not be used interchangeably. Many of these same individuals are also the so-called televangelists, but again, not all televangelists hold to prosperity teaching.
Some of the proponents of prosperity theology include:
The Theology of the Prosperity Gospel
"Theology is important," wrote scholar Millard J. Erickson, "because correct doctrinal beliefs are essential to the relationship between the believer and God." A corollary to this statement is that an incorrect theology will lead to incorrect beliefs about God, His Word, and His dealings with men. The thesis of this paper is that the prosperity gospel is constructed upon a faulty theology. Consequently, many of its doctrines, including the teachings concerning wealth, are erroneous. While it is beyond the scope of this study to examine in detail all of the specific doctrines of prosperity theology, there are four crucial areas of error relating to their teachings on wealth that may be isolated and examined. These areas are the Abrahamic covenant, the Atonement, giving, and faith.
Prosperity Theology and the Abrahamic Covenant
The theological basis of the prosperity gospel is the Abrahamic covenant. While this is good in that prosperity theologians recognize that much of Scripture is the record of the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant, it is bad in that they do not maintain an orthodox view of this covenant. Prosperity theologians hold an incorrect view of the inception of the Abrahamic covenant; what is more germane to the present study, however, they hold to an erroneous view concerning the application of the covenant.
Researcher Edward Pousson best stated the prosperity view on the application of the Abrahamic covenant when he wrote, "Christians are Abraham’s spiritual children and heirs to the blessings of faith.... This Abrahamic inheritance is unpacked primarily in terms of material entitlements."In other words, according to the prosperity gospel, the primary purpose of the Abrahamic covenant was for God to bless Abraham materially. Since believers are now "Abraham’s spiritual children," they consequently have inherited these financial blessings of the covenant.
Prosperity teacher Kenneth Copeland wrote, "Since God’s Covenant has been established and prosperity is a provision of this covenant, you need to realize that prosperity belongs to you now!" Referring to the prosperity theology of Kenneth Hagin, author Harvey Cox wrote, "Through the crucifixion of Christ, Christians have inherited all the promises made to Abraham, and these include both spiritual and material well-being."To support this claim, prosperity teachers such as Copeland and Hagin appeal to Gal. 3:14, which says "that the blessings of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus. . . ." While it is not an understatement to say that the problems with this argument are legion, two glaring problems need to be addressed. First, in their appeal to Gal. 3:14, prosperity teachers ignore the second half of the verse, which reads, "That we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." In this verse Paul clearly was reminding the Galatians of the spiritual blessing of salvation, not the material blessing of wealth.
Second, prosperity teachers claim that the conduit through which believers receive Abraham’s blessings is faith. This completely ignores the orthodox understanding that the Abrahamic covenant was an unconditional covenant. That is, the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant were not contingent upon one man’s obedience. Therefore, even if the Abrahamic covenant did apply to Christians, all believers would already be experiencing the material blessings regardless of prosperity theology.
Researcher Edward Pousson best stated the prosperity view on the application of the Abrahamic covenant when he wrote, "Christians are Abraham’s spiritual children and heirs to the blessings of faith.... This Abrahamic inheritance is unpacked primarily in terms of material entitlements."In other words, according to the prosperity gospel, the primary purpose of the Abrahamic covenant was for God to bless Abraham materially. Since believers are now "Abraham’s spiritual children," they consequently have inherited these financial blessings of the covenant.
Prosperity teacher Kenneth Copeland wrote, "Since God’s Covenant has been established and prosperity is a provision of this covenant, you need to realize that prosperity belongs to you now!" Referring to the prosperity theology of Kenneth Hagin, author Harvey Cox wrote, "Through the crucifixion of Christ, Christians have inherited all the promises made to Abraham, and these include both spiritual and material well-being."To support this claim, prosperity teachers such as Copeland and Hagin appeal to Gal. 3:14, which says "that the blessings of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus. . . ." While it is not an understatement to say that the problems with this argument are legion, two glaring problems need to be addressed. First, in their appeal to Gal. 3:14, prosperity teachers ignore the second half of the verse, which reads, "That we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." In this verse Paul clearly was reminding the Galatians of the spiritual blessing of salvation, not the material blessing of wealth.
Second, prosperity teachers claim that the conduit through which believers receive Abraham’s blessings is faith. This completely ignores the orthodox understanding that the Abrahamic covenant was an unconditional covenant. That is, the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant were not contingent upon one man’s obedience. Therefore, even if the Abrahamic covenant did apply to Christians, all believers would already be experiencing the material blessings regardless of prosperity theology.
Prosperity Theology and the Atonement
A second cracked pillar upon which prosperity theology stands is that of a faulty view of the Atonement. Theologian Ken Sarles wrote that "the prosperity gospel claims that both physical healing and financial prosperity have been provided for in the Atonement." This seems to be an accurate observation in light of teacher Kenneth Copeland’s comment that "the basic principle of the Christian life is to know that God put our sin, sickness, disease, sorrow, grief, and poverty on Jesus at Calvary." This misunderstanding of the Atonement stems from two errors that proponents of the prosperity gospel make.
First, many who hold to prosperity theology have a fundamental misconception of the life of Christ. For example, teacher John Avanzini proclaimed that "Jesus had a nice house, a big house," "Jesus was handling big money," and He even "wore designer clothes." It is easy to see how such a warped view of the life of Christ could lead to an equally warped misconception of the death of Christ.
A second error of prosperity theology, which also leads to a faulty view of the Atonement, is the misinterpretation of 2 Cor. 8:9. Without exception, this is the verse to which prosperity teachers appeal in order to support their view of the Atonement. The verse reads, "For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty might become rich." This problem with this interpretation is, of course, that in this verse Paul was in no way teaching that Christ died on the cross for the purpose of increasing anyone’s net worth materially. In fact, Paul was actually teaching the exact opposite principle.
Contextually, it is clear that Paul was teaching the Corinthians that since Christ accomplished so much for them through the Atonement, then how much more ought they empty themselves of their riches in service of the Savior. This is why just five short verses later Paul would urge the Corinthians to give their wealth away to their needy brothers, writing "that now at this time your abundance may supply their lack." Commentator Philip E. Hughes wrote of 2 Cor. 8:9, "The logic implicit in the statement of this great truth is too obvious for anyone to miss it." Apparently, however, the champions of the prosperity gospel have indeed missed it.
First, many who hold to prosperity theology have a fundamental misconception of the life of Christ. For example, teacher John Avanzini proclaimed that "Jesus had a nice house, a big house," "Jesus was handling big money," and He even "wore designer clothes." It is easy to see how such a warped view of the life of Christ could lead to an equally warped misconception of the death of Christ.
A second error of prosperity theology, which also leads to a faulty view of the Atonement, is the misinterpretation of 2 Cor. 8:9. Without exception, this is the verse to which prosperity teachers appeal in order to support their view of the Atonement. The verse reads, "For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty might become rich." This problem with this interpretation is, of course, that in this verse Paul was in no way teaching that Christ died on the cross for the purpose of increasing anyone’s net worth materially. In fact, Paul was actually teaching the exact opposite principle.
Contextually, it is clear that Paul was teaching the Corinthians that since Christ accomplished so much for them through the Atonement, then how much more ought they empty themselves of their riches in service of the Savior. This is why just five short verses later Paul would urge the Corinthians to give their wealth away to their needy brothers, writing "that now at this time your abundance may supply their lack." Commentator Philip E. Hughes wrote of 2 Cor. 8:9, "The logic implicit in the statement of this great truth is too obvious for anyone to miss it." Apparently, however, the champions of the prosperity gospel have indeed missed it.
Prosperity Theology and Giving
One of the most striking characteristics of the prosperity theologians is their seeming fixation with the act of giving. Students of the prosperity gospel are urged to give generously and are confronted with such pious statements as, "True prosperity is the ability to use God’s power to meet the needs of mankind in any realm of life," and, "We have been called to finance the gospel to the world." While at face value these statements do indeed appear to be praiseworthy, a closer examination of the theology behind them reveals that the prosperity gospel’s emphasis on giving is built on anything but philanthropic motives. The driving force behind this emphasis on giving is what teacher Robert Tilton referred to as the "Law of Compensation." According to this law, which is supposedly based on Mark 10:30, Christians need to give generously to others because when they do, God gives back more in return. This, in turn, leads to a cycle of ever-increasing prosperity.
As Gloria Copeland put it, "Give $10 and receive $1,000; give $1,000 and receive $100,000;... in short, Mark 10:30 is a very good deal." It is evident, then, that the prosperity gospel’s doctrine of giving is built upon faulty motives. Whereas Jesus taught His disciples to "give, hoping for nothing in return," prosperity theologians teach their disciples to give because they will get a great return. One cannot help but agree with author Edward Pousson’s observation that the stewardship of "the prosperity message is in captivity to the American dream."
As Gloria Copeland put it, "Give $10 and receive $1,000; give $1,000 and receive $100,000;... in short, Mark 10:30 is a very good deal." It is evident, then, that the prosperity gospel’s doctrine of giving is built upon faulty motives. Whereas Jesus taught His disciples to "give, hoping for nothing in return," prosperity theologians teach their disciples to give because they will get a great return. One cannot help but agree with author Edward Pousson’s observation that the stewardship of "the prosperity message is in captivity to the American dream."
Prosperity Theology and Faith
A final area of prosperity theology that merits investigation is that of the doctrine of faith. Whereas orthodox Christianity understands faith to be "trust in the person of Jesus Christ, the truth of His teaching, and the redemptive work He accomplished at Calvary," prosperity teachers espouse quite a different doctrine. In his book, The Laws of Prosperity, Kenneth Copeland wrote that "faith is a spiritual force, a spiritual energy, a spiritual power. It is this force of faith which makes the laws of the spirit world function. . . . There are certain laws governing prosperity revealed in God’s Word. Faith causes them to function." This is obviously a faulty, if not heretical, understanding of faith. Later in the same book Copeland wrote that "if you make up your mind . . . that you are willing to live in divine prosperity and abundance, . . . divine prosperity will come to pass in your life. You have exercised your faith." According to prosperity theology, faith is not a theocentric act of the will, or simply trust in God; rather it is an anthropocentric spiritual force, directed at God. Indeed, any theology that views faith solely as a means to material gain rather than the acceptance of heavenly justification must be judged as faulty and inadequate.
The Biblical Interpretation of the Prosperity Gospel
As has already been demonstrated in this paper, the hermeneutics of the prosperity movement leaves much to be desired. Author Ken Sarles wrote of the prosperity teachers that their "method of interpreting the biblical text is highly subjective and arbitrary. Bible verses are quoted in abundance without attention to grammatical indicators, semantic nuances, or literary and historical context. The result is a set of ideas and principles based on distortion of textual meaning." Indeed, a survey of the volumes of literature produced by the prosperity teachers yields numerous examples of such misinterpretations. As was the case in the theological study of this movement, an analysis of all such examples of misinterpreted texts would fall beyond the scope of this study. However, it is possible to choose one verse as an example and to examine both the prosperity gospel and orthodox interpretations of the text.
A suitable verse for this study is 3 John 2. In this verse, the Apostle John wrote, "Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers." This verse is interpreted by prosperity teachers to mean that God wants all believers to "prosper in all things." Furthermore, their interpretation of this verse makes clear their claim that material prosperity is inseparably linked to spiritual growth. Oral Roberts, regarded by many to be the father of the prosperity gospel movement, claimed at the beginning of his ministry, during a time of search for direction, that God miraculously led him to 3 John 2, which he understood as a revelation of the prosperity gospel.
Another faith teacher who has built his ministry around this faulty interpretation of 3 John 2 is Kenneth Copeland. Author Kenneth Kantzer noted that "Copeland misinterprets this [verse] as a universal promise," and writer Bruce Barron remarked that "the Copelands use these words so often that they appear to be the key verse of their ministry." A careful study of 3 John 2, however, reveals that this verse is not a carte blanche approval of prosperity gospel teachings.
Those who use 3 John 2 to support the prosperity gospel are committing two crucial errors, the first contextual and the second grammatical. First, con-textually, one is wise to note that John’s purpose in writing 3 John 2 was not to teach doctrine; it was simply to open his letter with a greeting. This is not to say that doctrine cannot be derived from a nondoctrinal passage, for all Scripture is profitable for doctrine, but it is to say that one must be sensitive to the original author’s intent. Therefore, the claim that 3 John 2 teaches the doctrine of prosperity ought to be regarded as suspect at best. Second, one is wise to note the meaning of the word "prosperity" as it occurs in this verse. The term translated "prosperity" is a form of the Greek word [FONT=Greek,Courier New]eujodovw[/FONT]. This word, which is used only four times in Scripture, does not mean to prosper in the sense of "gaining material possessions," but rather means "to grant a prosperous expedition and expeditious journey," or "to lead by a direct and easy way." The wording of modern translations such as the New International Version even reflect this nuance of the word. Therefore it is evident that teachers who understand 3 John 2 to teach prosperity theology are misinterpreting the text.
A suitable verse for this study is 3 John 2. In this verse, the Apostle John wrote, "Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers." This verse is interpreted by prosperity teachers to mean that God wants all believers to "prosper in all things." Furthermore, their interpretation of this verse makes clear their claim that material prosperity is inseparably linked to spiritual growth. Oral Roberts, regarded by many to be the father of the prosperity gospel movement, claimed at the beginning of his ministry, during a time of search for direction, that God miraculously led him to 3 John 2, which he understood as a revelation of the prosperity gospel.
Another faith teacher who has built his ministry around this faulty interpretation of 3 John 2 is Kenneth Copeland. Author Kenneth Kantzer noted that "Copeland misinterprets this [verse] as a universal promise," and writer Bruce Barron remarked that "the Copelands use these words so often that they appear to be the key verse of their ministry." A careful study of 3 John 2, however, reveals that this verse is not a carte blanche approval of prosperity gospel teachings.
Those who use 3 John 2 to support the prosperity gospel are committing two crucial errors, the first contextual and the second grammatical. First, con-textually, one is wise to note that John’s purpose in writing 3 John 2 was not to teach doctrine; it was simply to open his letter with a greeting. This is not to say that doctrine cannot be derived from a nondoctrinal passage, for all Scripture is profitable for doctrine, but it is to say that one must be sensitive to the original author’s intent. Therefore, the claim that 3 John 2 teaches the doctrine of prosperity ought to be regarded as suspect at best. Second, one is wise to note the meaning of the word "prosperity" as it occurs in this verse. The term translated "prosperity" is a form of the Greek word [FONT=Greek,Courier New]eujodovw[/FONT]. This word, which is used only four times in Scripture, does not mean to prosper in the sense of "gaining material possessions," but rather means "to grant a prosperous expedition and expeditious journey," or "to lead by a direct and easy way." The wording of modern translations such as the New International Version even reflect this nuance of the word. Therefore it is evident that teachers who understand 3 John 2 to teach prosperity theology are misinterpreting the text.
Conclusion
Through this study of the theology and the biblical interpretation of the prosperity gospel, one may discern five clear reasons why this movement’s teachings concerning wealth are incorrect:
- The prosperity gospel is built upon a faulty understanding of the Abrahamic covenant.
- The prosperity gospel is built upon a faulty understanding of the Atonement.
- The prosperity gospel is based upon a faulty understanding of the biblical tachings on giving.
- The prosperity gospel is based upon a faulty understanding of the biblical teachings on faith.
- The prosperity gospel, in general, has been constructed upon faulty biblical interpretation.
Aside from these five specific theological and biblical arguments against the prosperity gospel, and without even considering the practical implications of this movement, there is perhaps one general, summary reason why the prosperity gospel is a wayward gospel: its faulty view of the relationship between God and man. Simply put, if the prosperity gospel is correct, grace becomes obsolete, God becomes irrelevant, and man is the measure of all things. Whether it is the Abrahamic covenant, the Atonement, giving, faith, or the biblical interpretation of any given verse, the prosperity teacher seeks to turn the relationship between God and man into a financial quid pro quo transaction. As scholar James R. Goff noted, God is "reduced to a kind of ‘cosmic bellhop’ attending to the needs and desires of his creation." This is a wholly inadequate and unbiblical view of the relationship between God and man and the stewardship of wealth.
R
No, you did not. I'll post the question again: I have asked you this before, can you find me at least one person who believes in the Prosperity Gospel is what the "mainstream" believe it to be? This should not be very hard for you, I am asking you to find me just ONE.
I am asking you to give me at least one quote from the proponents of the theology that it means to become wealthy. I am convinced that you will find ample of quotes from the opponents. I want you to give me at least one quote from the proponents.
I am asking you to give me at least one quote from the proponents of the theology that it means to become wealthy. I am convinced that you will find ample of quotes from the opponents. I want you to give me at least one quote from the proponents.
thats exactly were it is from. i just want you to answer it?
and Psalm 1 is coming Im still on nightshift lol... you can't honestly expect to much of a man on nights lol
anyhow can you anser the above?? theres tonnes more on bible.org who are scholars, John pipers website and too many to mention.
I still belive you are ducking and diving between answering questions, you state a few scriptures but thats about all, as i have asked you before where do you stand on 'Prosperity Theology, or as i have stated before have you made your own prosperity gospel??
simple questions i would think??
still waiting for your 2 page easy you said you where going to write.
yours in Christ
Phil
and Psalm 1 is coming Im still on nightshift lol... you can't honestly expect to much of a man on nights lol
anyhow can you anser the above?? theres tonnes more on bible.org who are scholars, John pipers website and too many to mention.
I still belive you are ducking and diving between answering questions, you state a few scriptures but thats about all, as i have asked you before where do you stand on 'Prosperity Theology, or as i have stated before have you made your own prosperity gospel??
simple questions i would think??
still waiting for your 2 page easy you said you where going to write.
yours in Christ
Phil
A
What?????? Are you serious????? You're not joking????
Look, Wikipedia is public domain. If you think they have the definition of Prosperty Theology completely wrong, then just go edit it. However, the problem is that you can't make that site say whatever you it want to say, you have to have citations. But since you haven't done any reseearch on this topic, no wait you didn't say that, but you deny your familiarity with the current definition and you say you've never heard of anyone who preaches who are self-proclaimed Prosperty Gospel teachers, and when I give you a link to learn more about it you don't read it. You said you support the prosperty gospel but then you get mad when people confuse you with supporting the Prosperty Gospel.
Ok, just answer me one question (am I being naive asking you to directly answer a question??)
How do you know that is true? Or was that just an assumption???
Look, Wikipedia is public domain. If you think they have the definition of Prosperty Theology completely wrong, then just go edit it. However, the problem is that you can't make that site say whatever you it want to say, you have to have citations. But since you haven't done any reseearch on this topic, no wait you didn't say that, but you deny your familiarity with the current definition and you say you've never heard of anyone who preaches who are self-proclaimed Prosperty Gospel teachers, and when I give you a link to learn more about it you don't read it. You said you support the prosperty gospel but then you get mad when people confuse you with supporting the Prosperty Gospel.
Ok, just answer me one question (am I being naive asking you to directly answer a question??)
How do you know that is true? Or was that just an assumption???
R
Lol, you want me to answer an article? I could, but I do not want to. I'd rather answer you. I also think it's unfair to me to put so much effort to defend where I stand and for you to just post an article and me to answer it.
At this point, I am really tired of answering now. Right now, I want you guys to start answering me. Go into my posts and pick them apart.
Go near the bottom of page 6 for the first part.
At this point, I am really tired of answering now. Right now, I want you guys to start answering me. Go into my posts and pick them apart.
Go near the bottom of page 6 for the first part.
Sorry Rosinsky, I should have asked the question better, Since you have looked at this article from bible.org, you should have the answers at hand, so should be very easy for you to answer?
I think you are confused as to what the properity gospel is? or as I said before,in your studies have you got your own brand of prosperity gospel? I'm not sure what prosperity Theology you are referring too, unless you have your own.
Someone once told me ' a lot of knowledge used in the wrong way can be dangerous nad very misleading'.
humbly yours
phil
I think you are confused as to what the properity gospel is? or as I said before,in your studies have you got your own brand of prosperity gospel? I'm not sure what prosperity Theology you are referring too, unless you have your own.
Someone once told me ' a lot of knowledge used in the wrong way can be dangerous nad very misleading'.
humbly yours
phil
R
No, are you serious? I am asking you for a quote from a proponent of the theology of prosperity and your source come from wikipedia? The article there has NO quotes from the proponents of the theology.
The article actually support my stance:
Beyond just promoting materialism generally, critics also claim that the doctrine is used by its proponents to become wealthy and to finance their lavish lifestyles at the expense of donors.
So again, I am asking YOU to give me at least ONE quote from the proponent that define the prosperity theology as "becoming wealthy."
The article actually support my stance:
Beyond just promoting materialism generally, critics also claim that the doctrine is used by its proponents to become wealthy and to finance their lavish lifestyles at the expense of donors.
So again, I am asking YOU to give me at least ONE quote from the proponent that define the prosperity theology as "becoming wealthy."
A
Ok, where did you comment on James 2:5 - Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?
And what about
Matthew 19:24
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Mark 10:25
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Luke 18:25
Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Where did you comment on those? And did you watch that video Phil posted the link to?
Why won't you tell us what research you've done on this topic?? You keep quoting what you think is the teaching of prosperty theology, as if it were scripture, but you refuse to tell us where you read that. I never, ever, ever state something as if it were fact without being willing to back it up with fact. I don't expect anyone to believe me if I can't support what I say with facts. My mom says that's one of the things about going to university for to long is that you start footnoting your conversations. Seriously, if I state a fact, and I can't remember exactly where I read it, then I don't expect anyone to believe me. But if you make an unsupported fact in a paper and your prof asks you for the citation, are you going to tell him that none of his concern??? What college will let you get away with that? He took the time to read your paper, he has the right to know where you're getting your facts (and obviously you can't get a passing grade on a paper with no citations).
You keep demanding other people address the scripture you bring up, but you don't bother looking closly at what we are giving you. Like I said, this really leads me to believe that you want this view on prosperty to be true so much you'll believe it even if you're presented with Biblical facts that are showing you that you are wrong about that scripture. If that's the case, fine, just stop wasting our time.
And what about
Matthew 19:24
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Mark 10:25
It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Luke 18:25
Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Where did you comment on those? And did you watch that video Phil posted the link to?
Why won't you tell us what research you've done on this topic?? You keep quoting what you think is the teaching of prosperty theology, as if it were scripture, but you refuse to tell us where you read that. I never, ever, ever state something as if it were fact without being willing to back it up with fact. I don't expect anyone to believe me if I can't support what I say with facts. My mom says that's one of the things about going to university for to long is that you start footnoting your conversations. Seriously, if I state a fact, and I can't remember exactly where I read it, then I don't expect anyone to believe me. But if you make an unsupported fact in a paper and your prof asks you for the citation, are you going to tell him that none of his concern??? What college will let you get away with that? He took the time to read your paper, he has the right to know where you're getting your facts (and obviously you can't get a passing grade on a paper with no citations).
You keep demanding other people address the scripture you bring up, but you don't bother looking closly at what we are giving you. Like I said, this really leads me to believe that you want this view on prosperty to be true so much you'll believe it even if you're presented with Biblical facts that are showing you that you are wrong about that scripture. If that's the case, fine, just stop wasting our time.
- Status