CNN: Passions over 'prosperity gospel': Was Jesus wealthy?

[NavyDave]

So what liberals are saying is that being dirt poor and a failure should be praised while wealth and success in business should be viewed with envy and hate?

The didn't have Carpenter Unions back then, but I'm sure their actions left a major carbon footprint.

[Jumbo]

As to the Prosperity Gospel itself, I hate (yes, hate) it for two reasons:

You continue to present values, viewpoints, personal standards, and various other cognitive processes much similar to those of a known heathen. I'd worry about your soul except you manage to arrive at enough different conclusions on signifcant matters that you're probably safe (eternally speaking). :cool:

[AzSkinsFan63]

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Ain't nothing CNN writes going to change that truth no matter how much they try.

[alexey]

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Ain't nothing CNN writes going to change that truth no matter how much they try.

How can there be an "only Son" of an omnipotent God? Cannot he make more Sons?

Also, aren't we all his Sons and Daughters?

[boobiemiles]

This is why I argue for reading the scriptures in community. Thank you for providing me with a picture perfect example.

You people and you rigid understanding of religion. I swear. I am not sure what you mean by "scripture in a community". I can't argue with you about your faith. That is what relgion is suppose to be "yours". You are suppose to have a relationship with your diety, and understanding that can with stand any trial or tribulation. If having "scripture in community" gives you the strength to face death without fear, then so be it. In the end that is what relgion is suppose to do...and that is prepare you for the inevitable. We are all going to die. When judgement comes, reciting scripture, or understanding what some one else wrote will not matter. It's on YOU!; how you treat people, what you did with the time you had, did you do what you felt you were destine to do, etc. Or you just another person wanting to be right, because you are scared to death about being wrong?

[boobiemiles]

Yes just like Bill Clinton is the first Black President. :doh:

But Barrack Obama is White though

In Nova Scotia they worship a black Jesus Christ. Really,what is more perposterous, Jesus was a white guy with flowing blonde hair and a six pack, or he was the same color as most people in the middle east?

[alexey]

I think in some ways there is a disconnect between what Christianity is and what it ought to be.

What it ought to be is represented by several knowledgeable, well studied, and humble members of this board. What it is, unfortunately, seems to be represented by a large number of our fellow Americans for whom faith has become an enemy of knowledge and introspection, for example rendering them unable to properly evaluate even basic propositions like Evolution.

It seems that the "prosperity gospel" is just another example of this. I think the question is whether Christianity can become what it ought to be, and if so, how?

(yes a communal approach to studies could address this, but not if the community only includes like-minded individuals... and at these times of individual mobility and information exchange, it seems that like mindedness is often the basis on which communities are formed)

[techboy]

He said he was the son of god. Not god himself.

This is incorrect. This link will take you to Glenn Miller's excellent list of all of the explicit and implicit claims of Jesus of Nazareth and his followers that he was God. I'll elaborate on a couple of the most historically verifiable claims below.

The high Christology of the early Church came from Jesus himself. One example of this comes from the Parable of the Tenants.

Mark 12 (ESV)

The Parable of the Tenants

1(A) And he began to speak to them in parables. "A man planted( a vineyard© and put a fence around it and dug a pit for the winepress and built a tower, and(D) leased it to tenants and(E) went into another country. 2When the season came, he sent a servant[a] to the tenants to get from them some of the fruit of the vineyard. 3(F) And they took him and beat him and sent him away empty-handed. 4(G) Again(H) he sent to them another servant, and(I) they struck him on the head and(J) treated him shamefully. 5(K) And he sent another, and him they killed. And so with many others: some they beat, and some they killed. 6He had still one other,(L) a beloved son.(M) Finally he sent him to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' 7But those tenants said to one another,(N) 'This is the heir. Come,(O) let us kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.' 8And they took him and killed him and(P) threw him out of the vineyard. 9What will the owner of the vineyard do?(Q) He will® come and destroy the tenants and(S) give the vineyard to others. 10(T) Have you not read(U) this Scripture:

(V) "'The stone that the builders rejected

has become the cornerstone;

11this was the Lord’s doing,

and it is marvelous in our eyes'?"

12And(W) they were seeking to arrest him(X) but feared the people, for they perceived that he had told the parable against them. So they(Y) left him and went away.

Before we look at what this saying of Jesus is, uh, saying, I'd like to take a moment to explain why I chose this passage.

One of the things Jesus scholarship tries to do is determine what, if anything, can be determined about the life, works, and sayings of Jesus in an historical sense. Scholars only take seriously those things that can be verified via one or more historical criteria. It doesn't mean that other things in the text didn't happen, necessarily, just that they can't be proven.

It turns out that the Parable of the Tenants is accepted as an authentic saying of Jesus by scholars, even the most radical (such as the infamous Jesus Seminar, which famously voted and found only about 20% of the sayings of Jesus to be authentic).

There are a number of reasons for this. The saying is early, and multiply and independently attested. It is unlikely to be a later Christian invention, because, among other reasons, it includes no mention of ressurection. It also has been found to be very accurate in terms of actual absentee landowner practices of the day, historically, and it reflects and employs stock images found in rabbinic parables of the day, so it coheres with a Jewish mileu.

So, it's pretty much accepted that this is a provably genuine saying of Jesus. As Dr. Craig Evans (his Wikipedia page) notes in his Fabricating Jesus on page 138:

When understood properly and in full context, everything about the wicked vineyard tenants- including its context in the New Testament Gospels- argues that it originated with Jesus, not with the early church.

But what is Jesus saying? In this parable, as in other rabbinic parables of the day, the Vineyard is Israel and the owner is God (a common reference because of Isaiah 5). The tenants are the Jewish religious leaders (which is why they are angered). The servants are the prophets of God, sent to Israel, but beaten, turned away, and sometimes killed (as the history of the Old Testament shows).

And then we come to the son, Jesus. The son in this parable is the owner's only son. He is unique. He is more important than the servants. He is last to be sent.

This passage clearly shows that Jesus thought he was the Son of God, unique in relationship, above all the prophets. Further, in this passage, he predicts his own death at the hands of the Jewish authorities, outside the walls of Jerusalem.

All of this was blasphemy to the Jewish leadership, as can be seen from their reaction, and is why they eventually had him killed.

Another reason to believe that the historical Jesus had a divine self-understanding is found in Grant's Jesus on page 160 (emphasis is the author's):

But Jesus' specific claim that, as inaugurator of the Kingdom of God, he was able to forgive sins seemed, as the Pharisees and scribes had already noted in Galilee, to lend a sinister overtone to his own assertion, or the assertion of his disciples, that he was God's son. For since Jews regarded the forgiveness of sins as the prerogative of God alone, the claim to confer this forgiveness, especially if supported by a claim to the Sonship of God, implied that he himself was divine; in which case the sacrosanct Jewish monotheism was deliberately breached.

So, we have two historically supported authentic sayings of Jesus, accepted as genuine by even the most skeptical scholars, that tell us that Jesus had a divine self-understanding. Also keep in mind that Jesus was Jewish, so to claim to be divine could only mean one thing.

Again, consider the reaction of the Jewish authorities. They knew what Jesus was claiming.

In Nova Scotia they worship a black Jesus Christ. Really,what is more perposterous, Jesus was a white guy with flowing blonde hair and a six pack, or he was the same color as most people in the middle east?

It is highly likely that Jesus looked like any of the Semitic peoples of that area, not blond and blue-eyed. I don't think most would describe Yassir Arafat as black, though.

People that describe Jesus as black are likely doing the same thing as the people that made Jesus blond haired and blue eyed.

Really, though, there's nothing wrong with that. Jesus had a universal message, so it's not inappropriate for people to make him their own.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You people and you rigid understanding of religion. I swear. I am not sure what you mean by "scripture in a community". I can't argue with you about your faith. That is what relgion is suppose to be "yours". You are suppose to have a relationship with your diety, and understanding that can with stand any trial or tribulation. If having "scripture in community" gives you the strength to face death without fear, then so be it. In the end that is what relgion is suppose to do...and that is prepare you for the inevitable. We are all going to die. When judgement comes, reciting scripture, or understanding what some one else wrote will not matter. It's on YOU!; how you treat people, what you did with the time you had, did you do what you felt you were destine to do, etc. Or you just another person wanting to be right, because you are scared to death about being wrong?

Not according to Christian scriptures, there it is not a matter of what you did or who you were but instead it all boils down to whether or not you have trusted in Jesus Christ for your salvation. You call me rigid and I will gladly accept that because it means that I'm not moving or flexible on the the things that I understand are crucial to my faith and the faith passed down through the Christian community for the past 2000 years.

"Reading scripture in community" means that you don't read it in isolation, the truth of the scripture is not up to me, or you, but instead it is discovered and understood as true in the community of Christians, this includes lay people in the pews, pastors, Bishops, academics, theologians etc. We each have something to offer yet no one person is allowed to hijack the scriptures or their interpretation, this provides the needed corrective for those times when we find ourselves in error so that we can be lovingly corrected and brought back into proper understanding of truth.

You talk about religion as a means to an ends; prepare you for the inevitable; but that's not what Christianity is...it is not an ends focused faith (save your butt from the fire) instead Christianity is an ends in that through faith we are rightly before God in this life so that when the New Heaven and New Earth are made and all things are made new we too will be able to live the lives we were truly made to live.

[boobiemiles]

This is incorrect. This link will take you to Glenn Miller's excellent list of all of the explicit and implicit claims of Jesus of Nazareth and his followers that he was God. I'll elaborate on a couple of the most historically verifiable claims below.

The high Christology of the early Church came from Jesus himself. One example of this comes from the Parable of the Tenants.

Before we look at what this saying of Jesus is, uh, saying, I'd like to take a moment to explain why I chose this passage.

One of the things Jesus scholarship tries to do is determine what, if anything, can be determined about the life, works, and sayings of Jesus in an historical sense. Scholars only take seriously those things that can be verified via one or more historical criteria. It doesn't mean that other things in the text didn't happen, necessarily, just that they can't be proven.

It turns out that the Parable of the Tenants is accepted as an authentic saying of Jesus by scholars, even the most radical (such as the infamous Jesus Seminar, which famously voted and found only about 20% of the sayings of Jesus to be authentic).

There are a number of reasons for this. The saying is early, and multiply and independently attested. It is unlikely to be a later Christian invention, because, among other reasons, it includes no mention of ressurection. It also has been found to be very accurate in terms of actual absentee landowner practices of the day, historically, and it reflects and employs stock images found in rabbinic parables of the day, so it coheres with a Jewish mileu.

So, it's pretty much accepted that this is a provably genuine saying of Jesus. As Dr. Craig Evans (his Wikipedia page) notes in his Fabricating Jesus on page 138:

But what is Jesus saying? In this parable, as in other rabbinic parables of the day, the Vineyard is Israel and the owner is God (a common reference because of Isaiah 5). The tenants are the Jewish religious leaders (which is why they are angered). The servants are the prophets of God, sent to Israel, but beaten, turned away, and sometimes killed (as the history of the Old Testament shows).

And then we come to the son, Jesus. The son in this parable is the owner's only son. He is unique. He is more important than the servants. He is last to be sent.

This passage clearly shows that Jesus thought he was the Son of God, unique in relationship, above all the prophets. Further, in this passage, he predicts his own death at the hands of the Jewish authorities, outside the walls of Jerusalem.

All of this was blasphemy to the Jewish leadership, as can be seen from their reaction, and is why they eventually had him killed.

Another reason to believe that the historical Jesus had a divine self-understanding is found in Grant's Jesus on page 160 (emphasis is the author's):

So, we have two historically supported authentic sayings of Jesus, accepted as genuine by even the most skeptical scholars, that tell us that Jesus had a divine self-understanding. Also keep in mind that Jesus was Jewish, so to claim to be divine could only mean one thing.

Again, consider the reaction of the Jewish authorities. They knew what Jesus was claiming.

It is highly likely that Jesus looked like any of the Semitic peoples of that area, not blond and blue-eyed. I don't think most would describe Yassir Arafat as black, though.

People that describe Jesus as black are likely doing the same thing as the people that made Jesus blond haired and blue eyed.

Really, though, there's nothing wrong with that. Jesus had a universal message, so it's not inappropriate for people to make him their own.

I am going to look up these sayings. If Jesus really felt he was god, there is a serious problem here. Plus I when I say Jesus was black I mean a man of color. I will get back to you on this one.

[AsburySkinsFan]

(yes a communal approach to studies could address this, but not if the community only includes like-minded individuals... and at these times of individual mobility and information exchange, it seems that like mindedness is often the basis on which communities are formed)

Which is the whole reason that I don't understand "community" as being people of likemindedness; Christians certainly but the full range of Christian thought so that we can see and hear the chorus of scripture and the chorus of Christian tradition in order to understand if we are understanding, believing and acting righteously.

Thomas Oden (Christian theologian) once said, "I used to be afraid that I would never say anything new, now I am afraid I will." As Americans we are all about the new and we get infatuated with new things and new ideas, but the truth is that over 2000 years most of the thoughts have are to be thought about the Christian faith, scriptures and teachings have already been thought, evaluated, and judged accordingly by the community of faith.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I am going to look up these sayings. If Jesus really felt he was god, there is a serious problem here.

Yeah, the Pharisees thought there was a problem too when Jesus claimed to be divine so they killed him, but that didn't work so then they made up lies to cover it up.

Plus I when I say Jesus was black I mean a man of color. I will get back to you on this one.

Well we are all people of color from the darkest black to albino, Jesus looked like everyone else in the region, olive or tan skinned, dark hair, average height. When I was in Israel at the beginning of the month, I saw thousands of people who looked like Jesus would have looked.

[boobiemiles]

Not according to Christian scriptures, there it is not a matter of what you did or who you were but instead it all boils down to whether or not you have trusted in Jesus Christ for your salvation. You call me rigid and I will gladly accept that because it means that I'm not moving or flexible on the the things that I understand are crucial to my faith and the faith passed down through the Christian community for the past 2000 years.

"Reading scripture in community" means that you don't read it in isolation, the truth of the scripture is not up to me, or you, but instead it is discovered and understood as true in the community of Christians, this includes lay people in the pews, pastors, Bishops, academics, theologians etc. We each have something to offer yet no one person is allowed to hijack the scriptures or their interpretation, this provides the needed corrective for those times when we find ourselves in error so that we can be lovingly corrected and brought back into proper understanding of truth.

You talk about religion as a means to an ends; prepare you for the inevitable; but that's not what Christianity is...it is not an ends focused faith (save your butt from the fire) instead Christianity is an ends in that through faith we are rightly before God in this life so that when the New Heaven and New Earth are made and all things are made new we too will be able to live the lives we were truly made to live.

So your actions has noting to do with your salvation. Will the community be judged as a whole, or each individual? You act as though early christains had one scripture. Christianity has evolved since its inception. There was the apocrapha. I mean you can't be rigid and say "there is no understanding but this one". The Book of Thomas (an omitted book because it was seen as making Jesus a Nostic) make salvation a personal endevour. I know christians believe you will never die if you believe in Christ. That through Christ all is possible. Is that through just believing Christ is your personal Lord and Savior, or in the spirit of his deeds? It's all subjective. Jesus was flexible enough to interpret the old testament in a different way, and incorporate people from different walks of life into his movement, why can people who worship him do the same?

[boobiemiles]

Yeah, the Pharisees thought there was a problem too when Jesus claimed to be divine so they killed him, but that didn't work so then they made up lies to cover it up.

Hold on! I thought they crucified him because he challenged the high preist. I thought he was making the claim he was the "son of god" during passover, which was a capital offense. I don't remember Jesus saying he was God himself. I know he knew the myth of the messiah, demostrated by him arriving in Jerusalem on a donkey. I can't see him saying he was God himself.

[PeterMP]

Well, unless you are making the case that Jesus didn't actually become human, then I guess one would have to say that he did have to go to school, however they didn't go to school like we do; that would be an anachronism (reading our ways into their ways) Jesus was most likely educated by a rabbi and would have been chosen to be educated by that rabbi. Unless of course someone wants to make the argument that Jesus in the manger knew then all the intricacies of heaven and earth, and in that case I'll ask then "how was he human at all?"

God educated...no...the incarnate (God in flesh) human person of Jesus who became human...and lived as we live? Yes. I guess it comes down to the question did Jesus have to be potty trained? IMO, suggesting that Jesus was fully aware from the time of His birth crosses an VERY important line in the fully God/fully Human nature of Christ.

Who taught him to walk on water?

I think it is clear, even as human, Jesus had a connection with the Father that was unique, and had access to information that was beyond what anybody then or today could have taught him, and I don't think he "learned" that connection.

Jesus was human in the sense that he could feel pain, loss, happiness, etc. and had free will independent of the Father's plan.

[AsburySkinsFan]

So your actions has noting to do with your salvation. Will the community be judged as a whole, or each individual?

Judgment will be individual, and the forgiveness offered by the sacrifice cleanses us of our sins so we are made justified before God at the judgment. This is Old Testament sacrificial law brought to fulfillment in Christ Jesus.

You act as though early Christains had one scripture. Christianity has evolved since its inception. There was the apocrapha.

Apocrapha by its very name is exclusive by the fact that they are questionable books in their authenticity and authorship, saying the word Apocrapha is same as saying "the books that we're not sure about".

I mean you can't be rigid and say "there is no understanding but this one".

As far as Orthodox Christianity from the first century until today I can, Jesus is Lord and it is only through faith in Jesus that we are saved.

The Book of Thomas (an omitted book because it was seen as making Jesus a Nostic) make salvation a personal endevour.

The non-Gospel of Thomas was written at the very earliest in 200 AD, fully 100 years following the last Christian books contained in the NT, and the gnostics were completely rejected by the early church and the evidence of that rejection of their false teachings is that none of the gnostic books are contained within the Holy Canon. As such I don't care what the Gospel of Thomas claims about how salvation is attained, because relying on that book is like reading a comic book to find out today's news.

I know christians believe you will never die if you believe in Christ.

All depends on how one defines life, and dying.

That through Christ all is possible. Is that through just believing Christ is your personal Lord and Savior, or in the spirit of his deeds?

You cannot separate the two we know Jesus is Lord and savior and we place our faith in him as evidence by his deeds, although not just the "spirit" of his deeds as if he were simply a model of good behavior.

It's all subjective. Jesus was flexible enough to interpret the old testament in a different way, and incorporate people from different walks of life into his movement, why can people who worship him do the same?

Jesus didn't interpret the OT in a different way instead he interpreted it in the most rigid fashion imaginable through sacrifice we gain forgiveness, loving God with heart, soul, and mind, loving our neighbor as ourselves are all Old Testament commandments and Law. Furthermore your idea that incorporating people from different walks of life into his movement as something new to Jesus is blind to the fact that God's law is inclusive all people rich and poor, Jew and Gentile. And the covenant (contract) that God made with Abraham illustrates that fact in that God told Abraham that all the nations would be blessed because of his offspring...this is brought to fulfillment in Christ Jesus in whom we seek today for the blessing of salvation.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Hold on! I thought they crucified him because he challenged the high preist. I thought he was making the claim he was the "son of god" during passover, which was a capital offense. I don't remember Jesus saying he was God himself. I know he knew the myth of the messiah, demostrated by him arriving in Jerusalem on a donkey. I can't see him saying he was God himself.

Then read the Gospels. BTW, he was crucified because he called himself the King of the Jews which was treasonous against Caesar and it was the crime that was placed upon his cross. What's more is that the priests were seeking to take Jesus' life for about a year or so before his final passover. Oh, and the very fact that you refer to the theology of Messiah as a myth tips your hand.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Who taught him to walk on water?

There is a big difference in Jesus performing a miracle as an adult and suggesting that Jesus did not learn and develop naturally as a child. I'm sorry but I find it a bit of a stretch to suggest that Jesus as an infant had a fully developed brain that understood the workings of the universe. If that were so then he wasn't truly human.

I think it is clear, even as human, Jesus had a connection with the Father that was unique, and had access to information that was beyond what anybody then or today could have taught him, and I don't think he "learned" that connection.

Sure, Jesus had a closer connection, as close as any HUMAN could have but to say that he didn't learn as a boy...no sorry can't go there.

Jesus was human in the sense that he could feel pain, loss, happiness, etc. and had free will independent of the Father's plan.

and he learned.

[Chachie]

I mean he's the messiah, a star follows him and everything.

Forgive me. I'm straying from the subject... but how do you guys imagine this would happen?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Forgive me. I'm straying from the subject... but how do you guys imagine this would happen?

I was going to correct it earlier, but decided to let it slide. The star didn't "follow" Jesus, it led the Magi to Jesus...the rest is mystery.

[Chachie]

I was going to correct it earlier, but decided to let it slide. The star didn't "follow" Jesus, it led the Magi to Jesus...the rest is mystery.

Roger that. I'd ask this question again, even with your correction, but it's easily explainable... I guess.

[Vicious]

The time of not being able to touch the gods is over. We have a great understand of this universe, there is no proof or evidence of magic beings.

Maybe Jesus Christ was able to conceive his way of life as a mortal homo sapien. That is something people should keep in mind when they think it is so insurmountable to be like him.

[Chachie]

The time of not being able to touch the gods is over. We have a great understand of this universe, there is no proof or evidence of magic beings.

Wrong, Vicious!! You are so wrong!!!

[Zguy28]

Roger that. I'd ask this question again, even with your correction, but it's easily explainable... I guess.

Queue Von Daniken...

[polywog999]

Hold on! I thought they crucified him because he challenged the high preist. I thought he was making the claim he was the "son of god" during passover, which was a capital offense. I don't remember Jesus saying he was God himself. I know he knew the myth of the messiah, demostrated by him arriving in Jerusalem on a donkey. I can't see him saying he was God himself.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/jesusgd2.htm

This will explain things for you better. I think that the Bible only indirectly says that Jesus is god, but it does imply it.