aldenswan.com

It seems that Mr. Osteen is still generating some commentary from Ben Witherington. Now, I don’t know why Osteen bugs him so much; compared to what else is on TV in the name of Christianity, Osteen is pretty bland. But, he is incredibly successful. Today, all BW does is provide this quote from John Wesley under the title, “Memo to Mr. Osteen from John Wesley:

I fear, wherever riches have increased, the essence of religion has decreased in the same proportion. Therefore, I do not see how it is possible, in the nature of things, for any revival of religion to continue long. For religion must necessarily produce both industry and frugality, and these cannot but produce riches. But as riches increase, so will pride, anger, and love of the world in all its branches.

(Now, I first tried to leave a comment on Witherington’s blog, but I always have issues trying to log in to Blogger, so I gave up and decided to comment over here, not that he reads my blog.)

This afternoon I was flipping through the TV channels and happened upon Mr. Osteen. This particular sermon did, in fact, step over the line (in my opinion) into the “believe it, receive it” territory, which I don’t agree with. He was not, however, teaching that God will make you rich, but rather to have faith for things like getting out of debt.

But, is Wesley’s comment above any better? Is poverty more “holy” than prosperity? In fact, it seems that Wesley was a might confused and had mixed emotions about any kind of “religious” revival. If, in fact, the Gospel takes root in an area, he proposes that industry and frugality is a necessary result. Therefore, people prosper, which he theorizes will “kill” religion. It would seem that revival is self-defeating by his analysis.

Reading between the lines, however, I sense something which is perhaps more insidious than a prosperity gospel: the belief that poverty is tied to holiness. I am not an expert on Wesley or Methodism, but I do know that while he remained an Anglican, he was one of the early holiness preachers, holding an Arminian belief in man’s free will, and a belief that man can achieve (with the help of grace) a certain state of holiness. The problem with this thinking is that even with a professed belief in the prevenient grace of God, it results (often, if not always) in a works-based Christianity which stands in opposition to the Gospel of grace as taught by Paul. If this is the case, then Paul would say that it is no gospel at all:

Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort? - Galatians 3:3

Certainly an Earthly prosperity is not to be our goal; that much is clear. However, I don’t believe that a goal of poverty is in accordance with the abundant life that God has promised us, either. And, I do not see that our spirituality is tied to either poverty or prosperity. Either extreme can result in totally screwed up lives; however, a belief in prosperity is usually not (at least that I’ve heard) tied to our salvation. On the other hand, if we fall into a works-based gospel where our sanctification (and possibly our salvation) is dependent upon our own free will, then perhaps we have no gospel at all. I’m guessing that if one has to err, it would be better to err in faith in God than to put faith in your lack of wealth.

Obviously, Paul did not assign anything spiritual to a state of poverty or prosperity, and that’s where I’m going to have to come down on this issue:

I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. - Philippians 4:12

(However, plenty is a lot more fun.)

Thanks to my friend Mike for pointing out “former homosexual and HIV-positive Christian activist” James Hartline, who demonstrates that ultra right wing Christian fundamentalists also take advantage of our freedom of speech. Now, I’ve never heard of Mr. Hartline, but I felt compelled to go to the source and check him out. Wow. That’s all I can say.

Here, from his very own blog, is the quote that won him this prestigious award:

They shook their fists at God and said, “We don’t care what God says, we will issue our legal brief to support gay marriage in San Diego!” Then Mayor Jerry Sanders mocked the Christian vote and signed off on this rebellious legal document to support same-sex marriage.
And then the streets of La Jolla under the Mt. Soledad Cross began to cave in.

They shook their fists at God and said, “We don’t care what the Bible says, We want the California school children indoctrinated into homosexuality!” And then Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law the heinous SB777 which bans the use of “mom” and “dad” in the text books and promotes homosexuality to all school children in California.

And then the wildfires of Southern California engulfed the land like a raging judgment against the radicalized anti-christian California rebels.

Apparently Harry Reid was wrong. It’s not global warming, it is the gays. We should have known. So, Mr. Hartline, you win! If this blog made a profit, I’d send you a trophy or something. But, as it is, the prestige will have to suffice. I should point out, if you’re new to the blog, that the Freedom of Speech award is given to those who proudly take advantage of the First Amendment, which guarantees us the right to say really stupid things in front of millions of people.

What’s “really stupid” about the statement I quoted? Well, one of the commenters on Hartline’s blog had this to say:

god demolished new orleans via katrina. well, except bourbon street, where all the homos are.

currently, fires are burning in southern california, but the city of los angeles has been spared. west hollywood is still standing, but republican strongholds have been turned to ash.

clearly, god hates black people and republicans.

What’s wrong with this “judgment” mentality? Well, consider these Old Testament examples: God sends the flood, but saves the only “righteous” man left (and his family). When Abraham negotiated with God for Sodom & Gomorrah, God agreed to hold off judgment if a mere handful of righteous people remained; as it turned out, he removed Lot and family from the place first. Does God have a pattern of destroying the righteous and leaving the “sinners” behind? It wouldn’t seem so. By the way, in San Diego, you’d expect the Hillcrest area to go up in flames first (along with my favorite restaurants…), not conservative Poway and Rancho Bernardo. Were the people who died gay?

It’s bad theology, bad logic, and just plain ignorant. From this comment, it appears that Mr. Hartline doesn’t know his Bible, and doesn’t know his God (or maybe we have different gods…). I am not “pro-gay” by the way. I’m just pro-truth.

To Freedom of Speech!

Harry Reid!

For those who may not be aware, since it’s been some time since I gave out this award, The Freedom of Speech Award is given to those who go above and beyond in celebrating their right of freedom of speech. And, as I’ve explained before, the freedom of speech is defined by me as “the right to say really stupid things in front of millions of people.”

Which brings us to Harry Reid, who could qualify for this award on a fairly regular basis. But, I wait until I see a prime example of public stupidity - I mean, free speech - to take up space here. As reported on the Maverick Philosopher blog, The Hill posted an article Wednesday which included the following gem from our man Reid:

“One reason why we have the fires in California is global warming,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told reporters Tuesday, stressing the need to pass the Democrats’ comprehensive energy package.

In a perfect example of America’s much-valued privilege of Freedom of Speech, Reid is completely shameless in being a political opportunist as well as a speaker of public stupidity. Where else but in America! The Maverick P’s post goes on to make the following observation: “The hot air of a jackass like Reid plays more of a role that any supposed global warming.” However, as the Maverick P goes on to state, Hugh Hewitt doesn’t seem to appreciate free speech as much as I do:

Reid is a witless opportunist. Half a million people are evacuated, at least 1,200 homes have been lost so far, federal, state, county and local resources are performing acts of heroism all over California to save lives and property, and Harry Reid wants to blame it on global warming to score political points for his energy bill? What a creep.

Oh well… Hugh has his First Amendment rights, too. I just like to look at the positive side of things.