Rich and Famous Pastors
- Thread starter Patnubay
- Start date
-
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.
K
This here that I underlined is another thing that needs to be addressed, as just because a person points out some false teaching of another person it does not always come from a hatred perspective.
We are called in the bible that we are to do exactly that; reprove, rebuke, and then exhort out of love and by the scriptures to correct them in what they have said.
Any true born again Christian will accept correction and learn to bridle their tongue instead of using sarcastic hurtful remarks in their statements. If it goes beyond just stating the truth in the word and just using unedifying language from them, then they are not properly following the bible's standard and are being judgmental.
K
Thanks, Kenneth, but did you see LT's post that I was replying to? Pretty much sounded like a problem with rich people! And sorry for jumping in on older posts in the thread, just a difference in time zones and me getting all caught up on posts now lol. Thanks!
Because I do know some rich people who do nothing but help others with their money, but then you have the others who do not help out others or they only use a small percentage to help others and think they are doing enough. They make it into an obligation or just do it for a tax write off and therefore that will not be excepted according to the bible as that is not done in love.
S
Yea, I don't see faith as salvation, not unless it is a true active faith which leads to repentance and acceptance of Jesus as our savior. I suppose that's what I meant by true faith. It's hard to separate the two, for even the demons believe and tremble, but their faith is a natural and carnal faith. Just as any man can have natural faith.
What it amounts to though is that true faith contains substance and evidence. Abraham wasn't saved by works, but faith alone, but it was a true alive faith which moved him to action. His circumcision was a seal and a sign of his faith, not a part necessary for completion. Had it been a part necessary, then he could be given partial credit for his justification.
What it amounts to though is that true faith contains substance and evidence. Abraham wasn't saved by works, but faith alone, but it was a true alive faith which moved him to action. His circumcision was a seal and a sign of his faith, not a part necessary for completion. Had it been a part necessary, then he could be given partial credit for his justification.
K
No we can never take credit for walking as the Lord commanded us to walk in the faith, not even take partial credit for it.
For we would not even know what that true faith in Him required unless we heard His words, anything before that even if done in a morally proper manner would have still be done only for self and not for God.
Only by faith in Jesus does our works matter as they will be done by trust and love to follow Him.
Those works are done out of the fruits and guidance of the Holy Spirit being added to our lives, and Apostle Peter even states by adding those to our faith we will never stumble and thus and entrance will be supplied to us in the everlasting kingdom.
Yes I know it is hard to separate faith and salvation as two components of the faith and not one, because I use to be that way to when I first gave my full self to the Lord and dove into biblical studies. I was doing my own thing before this for about 10 years, and before that I was in a OSAS church that said we are saved no matter what we do from here. I found by the Holy Spirit that I have been mislead and that our actions are proof of a true faith.
For we would not even know what that true faith in Him required unless we heard His words, anything before that even if done in a morally proper manner would have still be done only for self and not for God.
Only by faith in Jesus does our works matter as they will be done by trust and love to follow Him.
Those works are done out of the fruits and guidance of the Holy Spirit being added to our lives, and Apostle Peter even states by adding those to our faith we will never stumble and thus and entrance will be supplied to us in the everlasting kingdom.
Yes I know it is hard to separate faith and salvation as two components of the faith and not one, because I use to be that way to when I first gave my full self to the Lord and dove into biblical studies. I was doing my own thing before this for about 10 years, and before that I was in a OSAS church that said we are saved no matter what we do from here. I found by the Holy Spirit that I have been mislead and that our actions are proof of a true faith.
S
I can agree with all that and still say that we are saved by faith alone. It's just impossible to have true saving faith without any actions to accompany it. The only distinction would be at the very moment of repentance and acceptance of salvation. Even then I suppose it might take a little time for good works to be seen by others but the Holy Spirit would have immidiently began the work of sanctification. In other words, a change took place, an agreement with God's will, even if that believer is still ignorant of most of the Word.
Aww, thanks, Patnubay! My avatar is my dog, Charlotte, and this is the image you get when she jumps on the bed and comes over to stare at you. She puts her face right up against yours, I'm not sure if she's nearsighted or what lol.
And here's the post from LT that I was responding to, unedited:
And yes, for LT (and for others reading this thread, I suspect), "Rich" preachers sets off red flags, and "wealth" for ministers is not approved of. Nothing here is mentioned in LT's post about attitude or spirituality, simply that rich and wealth seem to be "bad," which is what I was asking LT to clarify (or expand on) when I made my post.
(And now for the rambly part)
I think the thing I was most struck by was the, "A wealthy minister is never good. There is no need for them." Honestly, to that, I have to say, "Baloney." Why do we insist that our ministers be poor, or not reach "above" a certain tax bracket?
I had a wonderful pastor once who laboriously considered whether or not he should buy a new truck, because he was afraid of what the congregation might say. I hadn't realized until then, how judgmental people can be about those who serve the Lord, and the way they handle their finances. If I had enough finances (which I didn't), I would have bought that pastor the nicest brand-new truck and given it to him, anonymously, as a gift. However, I'm sure people still would have scrutinized him for that, sadly.
Monks throughout history have taken vows of poverty, which was very common. I'm sure people today still do it, certain Catholic sects, especially. I do not believe in vows of poverty, I am not a -fan- of poverty, and I have a problem with people who suggest that you can not (or should not) be both wealthy and a Christian at the same time. Or worse yet, wealthy and a minister! No, we should not lay up treasures for ourselves here, and acquiring worldly wealth should not be our -focus-. If, however, we have sought first the kingdom of God, and he has added these things unto us, then awesome!! Or, if we happen to be independently wealthy (inherited a large sum, for example), are we expected to give that all away to the poor? No!
There is nothing wrong with Christians living in nice houses and having nice things. Once again, man is looking at the outward appearance of those things, but God looks at the heart.
The pastor of the church I grew up in, after over 30 years of living in the parsonage, finally moved into a -beautiful- house, huge, with a gorgeous view. He and his lovely wife have people over for dinner all the time, and entertain there, and they are just as lovely as can be. It is not whether or not people have nice things that should matter, it is their heart before the Lord. And they should not be expected to give all their belongings away or live in poverty. Unless they've taken a vow. Which would mean we wouldn't see them on TV, and they probably don't have world-wide ministries lol.
Wow. This was very rambly of me, I apologize. I will now go back into my hidey-hole for a respectable amount of time, and come back later lol.
And here's the post from LT that I was responding to, unedited:
And yes, for LT (and for others reading this thread, I suspect), "Rich" preachers sets off red flags, and "wealth" for ministers is not approved of. Nothing here is mentioned in LT's post about attitude or spirituality, simply that rich and wealth seem to be "bad," which is what I was asking LT to clarify (or expand on) when I made my post.
(And now for the rambly part)
I think the thing I was most struck by was the, "A wealthy minister is never good. There is no need for them." Honestly, to that, I have to say, "Baloney." Why do we insist that our ministers be poor, or not reach "above" a certain tax bracket?
I had a wonderful pastor once who laboriously considered whether or not he should buy a new truck, because he was afraid of what the congregation might say. I hadn't realized until then, how judgmental people can be about those who serve the Lord, and the way they handle their finances. If I had enough finances (which I didn't), I would have bought that pastor the nicest brand-new truck and given it to him, anonymously, as a gift. However, I'm sure people still would have scrutinized him for that, sadly.
Monks throughout history have taken vows of poverty, which was very common. I'm sure people today still do it, certain Catholic sects, especially. I do not believe in vows of poverty, I am not a -fan- of poverty, and I have a problem with people who suggest that you can not (or should not) be both wealthy and a Christian at the same time. Or worse yet, wealthy and a minister! No, we should not lay up treasures for ourselves here, and acquiring worldly wealth should not be our -focus-. If, however, we have sought first the kingdom of God, and he has added these things unto us, then awesome!! Or, if we happen to be independently wealthy (inherited a large sum, for example), are we expected to give that all away to the poor? No!
There is nothing wrong with Christians living in nice houses and having nice things. Once again, man is looking at the outward appearance of those things, but God looks at the heart.
The pastor of the church I grew up in, after over 30 years of living in the parsonage, finally moved into a -beautiful- house, huge, with a gorgeous view. He and his lovely wife have people over for dinner all the time, and entertain there, and they are just as lovely as can be. It is not whether or not people have nice things that should matter, it is their heart before the Lord. And they should not be expected to give all their belongings away or live in poverty. Unless they've taken a vow. Which would mean we wouldn't see them on TV, and they probably don't have world-wide ministries lol.
Wow. This was very rambly of me, I apologize. I will now go back into my hidey-hole for a respectable amount of time, and come back later lol.
Last edited:
Aww, thanks, Patnubay! My avatar is my dog, Charlotte, and this is the image you get when she jumps on the bed and comes over to stare at you. She puts her face right up against yours, I'm not sure if she's nearsighted or what lol.
And here's the post from LT that I was responding to, unedited:
And yes, for LT (and for others reading this thread, I suspect), "Rich" preachers sets off red flags, and "wealth" for ministers is not approved of. Nothing here is mentioned in LT's post about attitude or spirituality, simply that rich and wealth seem to be "bad," which is what I was asking LT to clarify (or expand on) when I made my post.
(And now for the rambly part)
I think the thing I was most struck by was the, "A wealthy minister is never good. There is no need for them." Honestly, to that, I have to say, "Baloney." Why do we insist that our ministers be poor, or not reach "above" a certain tax bracket?
I had a wonderful pastor once who laboriously considered whether or not he should buy a new truck, because he was afraid of what the congregation might say. I hadn't realized until then, how judgmental people can be about those who serve the Lord, and the way they handle their finances. If I had enough finances (which I didn't), I would have bought that pastor the nicest brand-new truck and given it to him, anonymously, as a gift. However, I'm sure people still would have scrutinized him for that, sadly.
Monks throughout history have taken vows of poverty, which was very common. I'm sure people today still do it, certain Catholic sects, especially. I do not believe in vows of poverty, I am not a -fan- of poverty, and I have a problem with people who suggest that you can not (or should not) be both wealthy and a Christian at the same time. Or worse yet, wealthy and a minister! No, we should not lay up treasures for ourselves here, and acquiring worldly wealth should not be our -focus-. If, however, we have sought first the kingdom of God, and he has added these things unto us, then awesome!! Or, if we happen to be independently wealthy (inherited a large sum, for example), are we expected to give that all away to the poor? No!
There is nothing wrong with Christians living in nice houses and having nice things. Once again, man is looking at the outward appearance of those things, but God looks at the heart.
The pastor of the church I grew up in, after over 30 years of living in the parsonage, finally moved into a -beautiful- house, huge, with a gorgeous view. He and his lovely wife have people over for dinner all the time, and entertain there, and they are just as lovely as can be. It is not whether or not people have nice things that should matter, it is their heart before the Lord. And they should not be expected to give all their belongings away or live in poverty. Unless they've taken a vow. Which would mean we wouldn't see them on TV, and they probably don't have world-wide ministries lol.
Wow. This was very rambly of me, I apologize. I will now go back into my hidey-hole for a respectable amount of time, and come back later lol.
And here's the post from LT that I was responding to, unedited:
And yes, for LT (and for others reading this thread, I suspect), "Rich" preachers sets off red flags, and "wealth" for ministers is not approved of. Nothing here is mentioned in LT's post about attitude or spirituality, simply that rich and wealth seem to be "bad," which is what I was asking LT to clarify (or expand on) when I made my post.
(And now for the rambly part)
I think the thing I was most struck by was the, "A wealthy minister is never good. There is no need for them." Honestly, to that, I have to say, "Baloney." Why do we insist that our ministers be poor, or not reach "above" a certain tax bracket?
I had a wonderful pastor once who laboriously considered whether or not he should buy a new truck, because he was afraid of what the congregation might say. I hadn't realized until then, how judgmental people can be about those who serve the Lord, and the way they handle their finances. If I had enough finances (which I didn't), I would have bought that pastor the nicest brand-new truck and given it to him, anonymously, as a gift. However, I'm sure people still would have scrutinized him for that, sadly.
Monks throughout history have taken vows of poverty, which was very common. I'm sure people today still do it, certain Catholic sects, especially. I do not believe in vows of poverty, I am not a -fan- of poverty, and I have a problem with people who suggest that you can not (or should not) be both wealthy and a Christian at the same time. Or worse yet, wealthy and a minister! No, we should not lay up treasures for ourselves here, and acquiring worldly wealth should not be our -focus-. If, however, we have sought first the kingdom of God, and he has added these things unto us, then awesome!! Or, if we happen to be independently wealthy (inherited a large sum, for example), are we expected to give that all away to the poor? No!
There is nothing wrong with Christians living in nice houses and having nice things. Once again, man is looking at the outward appearance of those things, but God looks at the heart.
The pastor of the church I grew up in, after over 30 years of living in the parsonage, finally moved into a -beautiful- house, huge, with a gorgeous view. He and his lovely wife have people over for dinner all the time, and entertain there, and they are just as lovely as can be. It is not whether or not people have nice things that should matter, it is their heart before the Lord. And they should not be expected to give all their belongings away or live in poverty. Unless they've taken a vow. Which would mean we wouldn't see them on TV, and they probably don't have world-wide ministries lol.
Wow. This was very rambly of me, I apologize. I will now go back into my hidey-hole for a respectable amount of time, and come back later lol.
This is my take. LT was saying "wealthy" and you were saying, why should they be poor? Notice it now? Nobody wants them to be poor and I'm sure LT feels the same. The question is about the filthy rich pastors who did not inherit anything from anybody and yet are now living a very luxurious lives. How can these pastors be so filthy rich and remain effective pastors? I believe, there is a reason why Jesus said "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God." The point is , one cannot remain filthy rich while preaching God, Love and Compassion. It is just like oil and water. Remember, I refer to the "Filthy rich" not sufficient life of a Pastor. Google "rich pastors" and you'll see how "filthy rich" they are. This is the dilemma I am having. Are they feeding the sheep with the Word or word?
Please say "hello" to Charlotte.
S
My opinion is that all that matters is their heart and their obedience to do what God's called them to do. If they love money more than God then they are wrong but many poor people love money more than God. Money has nothing to do with it. It's the heart that matters. These men have great wealth but you and I can't judge their hearts. I truly believe that many of them would give it all away if God told them to. I can say that because they already give millions to help people. Men who are consumed by money wouldn't give away a dime.
