• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

The Prosperity Doctrine

Status
Not open for further replies.

Simon Peter

14th Generation PROTESTant
Mar 4, 2004
2,486
258
America
✟4,491.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I would say Jesus’ Ministry was far from poor and He would need an accountant, book keeper, treasurer, etc..
Because He had a pretty banging ministry.

Let’s see:
· He had 12 disciples
· He sent out 70
· That’s 83 with Himself included.

So Jesus’ ministry was so poor that it took care of 83 staff members and their families.
· I wish my ministry could be so poor…

Large ministies don't mean large wealth. You are looking at the situation through 21st century 'American' eyes.

Besides, according to Dkb we already know the assets of Jesus' ministry. By making the ministry larger, you are making it poorer. $16,000 won't go nearly as far amongst 85 men plus dependants.




peace,
Simon
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Simon Peter

14th Generation PROTESTant
Mar 4, 2004
2,486
258
America
✟4,491.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I don't always leave the house with any money or credit cards at all. but that does not mean that I have no money. it just means it's not on me.

My point was that $16,000 is alot of money to be carrying on you in cash. It is not all He had


1. So you guys are claiming that Jesus, and later Peter and John, didn't carry their wealth/money them, and that's why it's not mentioned in scripture!

2. And Jesus was the great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great...(times 27 or 42) grandson of David so may have inherited wealth, even though his father was a carpenter.

Talking of which, even Indiana Jones new the correct Holy Grail was the plain poor one. ;)

3. Roman Soldiers would not cast lots for poor clothing.

Even in today's wealthy nations, where we have hundreds of times more clothes than the people of the first century, people will steal your clothes.

I happen to think that Jesus clothing was not "poor" or wealthy. But it's possible His undergarment was quite expensive. But even if it was that is not evidence of wealth, it may have been a gift.

Can you show me scriptures which actually tell us that Jesus had wealth, other than the gifts he received as a 2 year old?

peace,
Simon
 
Upvote 0

importunity

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2007
1,885
2,001
Tennessee
✟78,680.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Simon I pulled out scriptue, kept it in context and even defined it with an actual Greek dictionary for the words used about Jesus being rich. But all you gave me was a commentary with a mans opinon and quite frankly with no evidence. So if you really want to get into this discussion, please come back to the original scripture I gave with solid biblical answers. I would be more than happy to discuss this with you in great detail. Heck if you want to get in a deeper discussion by all means email me (rbmi09@yahoo.com) that's my personal email.
 
Upvote 0

dkbwarrior

Favoured of the Lord
Sep 19, 2006
4,186
511
60
Tulsa, Oklahoma
✟29,349.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
This was a first century travelling ministry, I don't think they deposited the rest of their finances in the Bank of Rome and made withdrawals every time they stopped in a new village. The coins they had was what the ministry had.

If the stewards wife had money then it was her money. She obviously helped out, but it's difficult to say 'Jesus was rich', because the husband of one of the woman who was associated with His ministry, was rich.



That was about 27 to 42 generations earlier. Do the math.


peace,
Simon

I never said Jesus was "rich", at least not in the sense that you mean. I wasn't there, I don't know what He had or didn't have. I was responding to the poster that said that Jesus was poor. Therefore I said He was far from poor. Saying that Jesus was poor, or that the apostles were poor, is simply false, and reflects a lack of basic Bible knowledge. Please go back and read my posts, if you are confused about this.

If we are guessing, I would say there is far more evidence that He was rich than He was poor, but I am not making that claim. In any case, I do believe that He was rich in the biblical sense, which means to have an abundant supply, more than enough for yourself, and to help others. I don't neccesarily think it means Bill Gates or Solomon status. Although, if that is what you wanted to believe for, it would fit within the biblical promises of wealth.

But I have a bigger problem with how you are defining wealth. You are defining rich in a western sense, how much do you own. But I don't see material wealth, or riches in the Bible in that light. It is always having an abundant supply to accomplish whatever God has called you to, to meet whatever need that you have as well as the needs of those around you, and to give to every good work. You don't personally have to have the supply under your direct ownership, nor on your person to meet this criteria. The fact that Jesus had "many" wealthy women who supported His ministry would mean that when they had a financial need, He could call on them. This is pretty evident to me. And, if the need was immediate, when money wasn't avialable, there was the annointing to supply the need, like the feeding of the 5,000. Just like Jesus only having 16,000 on him, I am sure that these women had more than enough money to feed the 5,000, but it wasn't with them. They would have had to send for it, as they cannot carry that amount on them, but that would do little good at the time, as the need was immediate.

For myself, I rarely have any cash on me, and if I do, it is less than 50 dollars. Now, although I am not what the world would consider rich, that is a far cry from what I am worth, or what I have access to.

Peace...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Simon Peter

14th Generation PROTESTant
Mar 4, 2004
2,486
258
America
✟4,491.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Simon I pulled out scriptue, kept it in context and even defined it with an actual Greek dictionary for the words used about Jesus being rich. But all you gave me was a commentary with a mans opinon and quite frankly with no evidence. So if you really want to get into this discussion, please come back to the original scripture I gave with solid biblical answers. I would be more than happy to discuss this with you in great detail. Heck if you want to get in a deeper discussion by all means email me (rbmi09@yahoo.com) that's my personal email.

Thank for your kind offer to discuss this privately. But this is a good place to discuss these things, and other people may also want to read what you have to say.

I only posted the MH commentary to indicate the historical and traditional interpretation of 2Cor 8:9

9 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that you through his poverty might become rich.
10 And here is my advice about what is best for you in this matter: Last year you were the first not only to give but also to have the desire to do so.
11 Now finish the work, so that your eager willingness to do it may be matched by your completion of it, according to your means.
12 For if the willingness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has, not according to what he does not have.
13 Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.
14 At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality,
2 Corinthians 8:9-14 NIV

MH Commentary:

And you know, saith the apostle, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ (2Co_8:9), that though he was rich, as being God, equal in power and glory with the Father, rich in all the glory and blessedness of the upper world, yet for your sakes he became poor; not only did become man for us, but he became poor also. He was born in poor circumstances, lived a poor life, and died in poverty; and this was for our sakes, that we thereby might be made rich, rich in the love and favour of God, rich in the blessings and promises of the new covenant, rich in the hopes of eternal life, being heirs of the kingdom.


As for the Greek dictionary, did you read the part that says "or figuratively"?

Because that means the Greek dictionary does not know if the word is being used in the more literal (by product) sense that you suggest, or the figurative (eternal) sense that Matthew Henry suggests.

The context of this is Paul receiving an offering.

Now let's check out what he's saying?

He was rich
g4145. πλούσιος plousios; from 4149 ; wealthy; figuratively, abounding with: — rich.

Well you might say? That was when he was in heaven... Ok let's see.

yet for your sakes He became poor,
g4433. πτωχεύω ptōcheuō; from 4434 ; to be a beggar, i.e. (by implication) to become indigent (figuratively): — become poor.

The only time Jesus was ever at this status of a beggar or indigent was at the cross of Calvary.

It says through His poverty might become rich.
g4147. πλουτέω plouteō; from 4148 ; to be (or become) wealthy (literally or figuratively): — be increased with goods, (be made, wax) rich.


In other words this scripture (or any other) should not be used as a prooftext. You must read it in light of others scriptures like:

Looking at his disciples, he said: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Luke 6:20

"But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.
Luke 6:24

Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith
James 2:5a NIV



peace,
Simon
 
Upvote 0

Simon Peter

14th Generation PROTESTant
Mar 4, 2004
2,486
258
America
✟4,491.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I never said Jesus was "rich", at least not in the sense that you mean. I wasn't there, I don't know what He had or didn't have. I was responding to the poster that said that Jesus was poor. Therefore I said He was far from poor. Saying that Jesus was poor, or that the apostles were poor, is simply false, and reflects a lack of basic Bible knowledge.

If we are guessing, I would say there is far more evidence that He was rich than He was poor, but I am not making that claim. ...


Alright, it seems Importunity is saying Jesus was rich, and you are saying He was far from poor, and would guess that He was rich.

I agree that He had His Father's provision at His disposal, but I think in the eyes of the world He was poor.


peace,
Simon
 
Upvote 0

dkbwarrior

Favoured of the Lord
Sep 19, 2006
4,186
511
60
Tulsa, Oklahoma
✟29,349.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Thank for your kind offer to discuss this privately. But this is a good place to discuss these things, and other people may also want to read what you have to say.

I only posted the MH commentary to indicate the historical and traditional interpretation of 2Cor 8:9

As for the Greek dictionary, did you read the part that says "or figuratively"?

Because that means the Greek dictionary does not know if the word is being used in the more literal (by product) sense that you suggest, or the figurative (eternal) sense that Matthew Henry suggests.

Which is why you have to read the context that it appears in, as well as look at the greater context of the subject throughout the Bible. This verse is buried in the middle of two chapters that are talking about money, sowing and reaping money, and giving and receiving money. It would be completely out of context to say that this one verse in the middle of all the others switches the subject and therefore the definition to the word "rich" to a spiritual meaning; without, I may add, any indication that the writer is doing so. It requires complete assumption on your part, and defies the context.


In other words this scripture (or any other) should not be used as a prooftext. You must read it in light of others scriptures like:

Looking at his disciples, he said: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.
Luke 6:20

"But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort.
Luke 6:24

Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith
James 2:5a NIV



peace,
Simon

It is almost laughable that you are insisting on context, after your wresting away of the meaning of the word "rich" in 2 Corinthians 8:9. But to give you further 'context', Matthew renders the statement in Luke slightly differently:

3Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
-Matthew 5:3

This would mean that Jesus is referring specifically to spiritual poverty here, not money.

It is just flat out hilarious to me that you take a verse that in context is certainly referring to money, and say it is spiritual when it is talking about riches (in 2 cor. 8:9); then turn around and take a verse that in context is certainly referring to a spiritual state (Luke 6:20), and apply it to money when it is referring to poverty. It is almost like you are thinking that poverty is holy or something.

Furthermore, Matthews account of Luke 6:24 seems to indicate that the 'rich' that Jesus was talking about were the ones giving alms to be seen of men, not that simply being rich is a sin, (Matt. 6:1-2). I mean, what about Abraham, and David, and Solomon? Is it woe to them also? If you continue to read in Luke 6 Jesus says this:

25Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep.
-Luke 6::25

So when you eat a full meal, it is woe to you, and if you laugh it is woe to you? Use some common sense friend. He is not talking about being poor or being rich or having a full tummy or laughing, in and of themselves. He is talking about the spiritual side of these things, misusing them, and/or having a wrong relationship with them; not the things themselves. And Matthews more detailed record of this sermon will show you that.

I don't know how you did it, but you managed to wrest these verses into meaning exactly the opposite of what they are saying. You amaze me with your abilty to twist these scriptures.

Peace...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

importunity

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2007
1,885
2,001
Tennessee
✟78,680.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Alright, it seems Importunity is saying Jesus was rich, and you are saying He was far from poor, and would guess that He was rich.

I agree that He had His Father's provision at His disposal, but I think in the eyes of the world He was poor.


peace,
Simon

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. (2 Corinthians 8:9 NKJV)

Like I said before the context of this is Paul talking about taking up a natural offering. It continues in chapter 9. So knowing that the context is talking about finances (offering). He even uses the example in the next chapter (9) about giving seed (he's using this illustration in reference to finance) to the sower and bread to the eater.

Now with the context being understood as him taking up an offering (financial support), we know the offering at least is physical and not spiritual. So how do I know if it was spiritual, physical or both?

Lets take a look at 4 words in the scripture we are not in agreement over.

He was RICH
g4145. πλούσιος plousios; from 4149 ; wealthy; figuratively, abounding with: —
rich. AV (28) - rich 28;
I. Wealthy, abounding in material resources
II. Metaph. abounding, abundantly supplied
A. Abounding (rich) in Christian virtues and eternal possessions

He became POOR
g4433. πτωχεύω ptōcheuō; from 4434 ; to be a beggar, i.e. (by implication) to
become indigent (figuratively): — become poor. AV (1) - become poor 1;
I. To be a beggar, to beg, to be poor g4434.

Through His POVERTY
g4432. πτωχεία ptōcheia; from 4433 ; beggary, i.e. indigence (literally or
figuratively): — poverty. g4433.

Might become RICH
g4147. πλουτέω plouteō; from 4148 ; to be (or become) wealthy (literally or
figuratively): — be increased with goods, (be made, wax) rich.

First of all the word rich are two different words here, and two different words for poor.

So in trying to figure out what rich He's talking about I have to figure out a few other things. Like what poor or poverty he's talking about. If He's talking about something spiritual then it would imply that their was a time that they were more spiritually rich than Jesus. I don't believe that so now I have to go back to the context and the words. In doing so I look at his poverty and my rich. Trying to figure this out the only time men were richer than Jesus (physically) was when He was on the cross.

Looking at the word poverty in the Greek it puts Jesus as indigent or the status of a beggar. So the only time that was the case was when He was stripped naked and the Sin of the world was upon Him.

I have been young, and now am old; Yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken, Nor his descendants begging bread. He is ever merciful, and lends; And his descendants are blessed. (Psalm 37:25, 26 NKJV)

The only time Jesus was forsaken and at the status of a beggar was on the Cross. So one can conclude this is talking about a physical condition. It fits the context that Paul was talking about. He was assuring them, building their faith.

The offer to you of an email correspondence is I am a pastor and I get real busy. So I might not jump on here to go back and forth all the time. I was giving you an avenue to continue if you wish (I check my emails all the time). What I have given you thus far is not even an introduction to my studies on this subject. The offer is there so if you are serious about our discussion to being open as I am open. Then we can continue. It's not about me being right or you being right, it's about truth in the Word.

I used to hate the prosperity message, it's not the message, it's the messenger. There are a lot of people trying to take this message and pervert it. Both ways... Impoverished and wealth. There is a balanced view for which I believe. I don't chase poverty and I don't chase wealth... I chase Christ alone.

Be blessed my brother.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Simon Peter

14th Generation PROTESTant
Mar 4, 2004
2,486
258
America
✟4,491.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Which is why you have to read the context that it appears in, as well as look at the greater context of the subject throughout the Bible. This verse is buried in the middle of two chapters that are talking about money, sowing and reaping money, and giving and receiving money. It would be completely out of context to say that this one verse in the middle of all the others switches the subject and therefore the definition to the word "rich" to a spiritual meaning; without, I may add, any indication that the writer is doing so. It requires complete assumption on your part, and defies the context.

I think you mean: 'It requires complete assumption on Matthew Henry's part...'

Though I do agree with Henry's conclusion in this instance. Henry is one of the most well known and well respected authors in Protestant Christendom. Charles Spurgeon and George Whitefield had great things to say about MHs commentary.

Not saying I agree with everything Henry says, but don't be so quick to claim his view is "almost laughable" or be amazed at his "ability to twist scriptures". Show a little respect. :)

Luke and Matthew relate two DIFFERENT sermons. This is widely acknowledged by scholars.

Luke talks of Jesus going DOWN a mountain and preaching on a plain.

Matthew talks of Jesus going UP a mountain and preaching on a mountainside.

Therefore:

"Blessed are the poor in spirit"
AND
"Blessed are the poor"


So when you eat a full meal, it is woe to you, and if you laugh it is woe to you? Use some common sense friend. He is not talking about being poor or being rich or having a full tummy or laughing, in and of themselves.

Jesus is saying that it's better not to be well fed, wealthy, comfortable, happy and well respected in this life, but persecuted, poor and miserable like the prophets of old. Because then your reward will be in Heaven instead of in this life.

peace,
Simon
 
Upvote 0

bloodbought09

Veteran
Feb 8, 2010
1,999
121
53
united states
✟25,354.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Jesus may have been rich in the sense that Joseph was a carpenter and made money from this profession. Though Jesus came from the direct line of David, I do think that the worldly kingship was asurped from this line.

Jesus sent out the disciples and told them to bring no purse and no script. The ministry was not for those to sow into their ministry but to cast out devils and to heal the sick.

When Jesus received the 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish in one miracle that He did, He lifted it to heaven and asked that it be multiplied. This is the provision He had from heaven in that He is the bread of life and the fish were multiplied as well. The fish of the sea are the world. The bread of life brings many in the world to salvation.

Jesus was not rich and I do not think He intends for His church to be rich as well in the sense that it takes from those in need to do nothing but preach the gospel of "money cometh to me now". There is the temptation with riches to say "Who is the Lord." Even the proverb says, "Do not give me too little that I steal and do not give me to much that I say "Who is the Lord". There is the temptation to worship money and not the Lord. Jesus said we cannot serve God and money. He will hold to the one and despise the other. So if we hold on to God we will despise money. Though money may come to us we will be ready to give it away to what it is intended to be used for: Feeding the poor, taking care of the fatherless, visiting widows in time of distress, distributing to the needs of the saints (those who do not just preach prosperity to begat prosperity but preach the word of God that does not return void. If it is not the word of God, it is vanity)

God will judge each man by his works, whether it be evil or good. He will judge what we did with His Son Jesus Christ and each work will be tested by fire. Some He will say to "Depart from Me you who work lawlessness, I never knew you. We must know that He knows us and we abide in Him. Let's make sure we are in His word and not listening to preachers who tickle the ears and make merchandise of us.

Right now I listen to the bible on-line. The pure word of God and not to preachers who twist scripture or take the word of God out of context to support their false doctrines. Even the cult religions such as the Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses do this and bring people into bondage. Not very hard to be clear of this deception to those who are in the word but what of those that can be so decieved that even the elect may be deceived, if it were possible. This is why there is a warning of seducing spirits and doctrines of demons in Timothy. Because there is and will be those who will try to seduce us from following the truth even if it is under the banner of Christianity. So that we that who have escaped the corruption of the world are brought right back into the world under the name of Christianity.:)
 
Upvote 0

psalms 91

Legend
Dec 27, 2004
71,903
13,538
✟134,786.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I really am to a point in all this that it is OK for someone to remain ignotant if they so choose. If you want to stay sick and deny the power of healing then stay sick, if you want to deny the prosperity of God towards you, then by all means remain poor. Salvation is so much more than being saved and Jesus paid the price for all of it but if you choose to deny that then so be it.
 
Upvote 0

Simon Peter

14th Generation PROTESTant
Mar 4, 2004
2,486
258
America
✟4,491.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I really am to a point in all this that it is OK for someone to remain ignotant if they so choose. If you want to stay sick and deny the power of healing then stay sick, if you want to deny the prosperity of God towards you, then by all means remain poor. Salvation is so much more than being saved and Jesus paid the price for all of it but if you choose to deny that then so be it.

I don't think anyone on this thread is denying the power of God's healing. I have experienced the miracle of God's instant healing on more than one occasion, but that doesn't mean that I believe I will always be healed.


When you say "then by all means remain poor" what makes you think I - or other non-prosperity Christians - are poor?


I believe in God's provision, but that doesn't mean I think God always wants me to be wealthy. In the past I've experienced poverty (as the west knows poverty) and I may in the future. I'm not afraid of poverty. I don't think it's a curse, and in many ways it is even a blessing. However, being wealthy can easily be a curse.


peace,
Simon
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Faulty
Upvote 0

psalms 91

Legend
Dec 27, 2004
71,903
13,538
✟134,786.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
I don't think anyone on this thread is denying the power of God's healing. I have experienced the miracle of God's instant healing on more than one occasion, but that doesn't mean that I believe I will always be healed.


When you say "then by all means remain poor" what makes you think I - or other non-prosperity Christians - are poor?


I believe in God's provision, but that doesn't mean I think God always wants me to be wealthy. In the past I've experienced poverty (as the west knows poverty) and I may in the future. I'm not afraid of poverty. I don't think it's a curse, and in many ways it is even a blessing. However, being wealthy can easily be a curse.


peace,
Simon
OK U agree with this, poverty is not an indicator of Gods blessing but His provision is. I advocate propvisdion according to Gods will, nit being rich. I do not believe in name it and claim it or blab it and grab it
 
Upvote 0

Simon Peter

14th Generation PROTESTant
Mar 4, 2004
2,486
258
America
✟4,491.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
OK U agree with this, poverty is not an indicator of Gods blessing but His provision is. I advocate propvisdion according to Gods will, nit being rich. I do not believe in name it and claim it or blab it and grab it


No, the scriptures do NOT say:

Blessed are you who are rich, for yours is the kingdom of God
Blessed are you who are full, for you are satsified.
Blessed are you who laugh
Blessed are you when men love you
Blessed are the healthy

God has great compassion for, and the blessing of God is upon:

the poor
the sick
the despised
the hungry

When I say I believe in the provision of God, I mean that I am fully confident that God is able to provide.
When God does not provide according to my desire, then I humbly accept that as my lot, knowing that there is God's blessing in lack, and there is a greater future reward for those who suffer.


peace,
Simon
 
Upvote 0

rturner76

Domine non-sum dignus
Site Supporter
May 10, 2011
11,529
4,030
Twin Cities
✟867,533.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
No, the scriptures do NOT say:

Blessed are you who are rich, for yours is the kingdom of God
Blessed are you who are full, for you are satsified.
Blessed are you who laugh
Blessed are you when men love you
Blessed are the healthy

God has great compassion for, and the blessing of God is upon:

the poor
the sick
the despised
the hungry

When I say I believe in the provision of God, I mean that I am fully confident that God is able to provide.
When God does not provide according to my desire, then I humbly accept that as my lot, knowing that there is God's blessing in lack, and there is a greater future reward for those who suffer.


peace,
Simon

Amen-

"Take up your cross" Not "Take up your Rolex" "Poverty, Chastity, Obedience" not "Riches, gluttony, selfishness" "Munny come to me?" nah, "Jesus come to me" Blessed are the meek.
 
Upvote 0

Faulty

bind on pick up
Site Supporter
Apr 23, 2005
9,467
1,019
✟87,489.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Matthew 6:33 (NASB)
33 But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

Some of you need to see what God said He will add to us.

The "these things" are food and clothing, in context.
 
Upvote 0

dollarsbill

Well-Known Member
Jan 17, 2012
6,676
147
✟7,746.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The "these things" are food and clothing, in context.
"All these things", including "treasures".

Matthew 6:19 (NASB)
19 Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.
 
Upvote 0

importunity

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2007
1,885
2,001
Tennessee
✟78,680.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
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. (2 Corinthians 8:9 NKJV)

Like I said before the context of this is Paul talking about taking up a natural offering. It continues in chapter 9. So knowing that the context is talking about finances (offering). He even uses the example in the next chapter (9) about giving seed (he's using this illustration in reference to finance) to the sower and bread to the eater.

Now with the context being understood as him taking up an offering (financial support), we know the offering at least is physical and not spiritual. So how do I know if it was spiritual, physical or both?

Lets take a look at 4 words in the scripture we are not in agreement over.

He was RICH
g4145. πλούσιος plousios; from 4149 ; wealthy; figuratively, abounding with: —
rich. AV (28) - rich 28;
I. Wealthy, abounding in material resources
II. Metaph. abounding, abundantly supplied
A. Abounding (rich) in Christian virtues and eternal possessions

He became POOR
g4433. πτωχεύω ptōcheuō; from 4434 ; to be a beggar, i.e. (by implication) to
become indigent (figuratively): — become poor. AV (1) - become poor 1;
I. To be a beggar, to beg, to be poor g4434.

Through His POVERTY
g4432. πτωχεία ptōcheia; from 4433 ; beggary, i.e. indigence (literally or
figuratively): — poverty. g4433.

Might become RICH
g4147. πλουτέω plouteō; from 4148 ; to be (or become) wealthy (literally or
figuratively): — be increased with goods, (be made, wax) rich.

First of all the word rich are two different words here, and two different words for poor.

So in trying to figure out what rich He's talking about I have to figure out a few other things. Like what poor or poverty he's talking about. If He's talking about something spiritual then it would imply that their was a time that they were more spiritually rich than Jesus. I don't believe that, so now I have to go back to the context and the words. In doing so I look at his poverty and my rich. In trying to figure this out, the only time men were richer than Jesus (physically) was when He was on the cross.

Looking at the word poverty in the Greek it puts Jesus as indigent or the status of a beggar. So the only time that was the case was when He was stripped naked and the Sin of the world was upon Him.

I have been young, and now am old; Yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken, Nor his descendants begging bread. He is ever merciful, and lends; And his descendants are blessed. (Psalm 37:25, 26 NKJV)

The only time Jesus was forsaken and at the status of a beggar was on the Cross. So one can conclude this is talking about a physical condition. It fits the context that Paul was talking about. He was assuring them, building their faith.

The offer to you of an email correspondence is I am a pastor and I get real busy. So I might not jump on here to go back and forth all the time. I was giving you an avenue to continue if you wish (I check my emails all the time). What I have given you thus far is not even an introduction to my studies on this subject. The offer is there so if you are serious about our discussion to being open as I am open. Then we can continue. It's not about me being right or you being right, it's about truth in the Word.

I used to hate the prosperity message, it's not the message, it's the messenger. There are a lot of people trying to take this message and pervert it. Both ways... Impoverished and wealth. There is a balanced view for which I believe. I don't chase poverty and I don't chase wealth... I chase Christ alone.

Be blessed my brother.

There was never really a solid answer given. Everything was opinion and not study? So, I guess this debate is not for people actually wanting to discuss an issue but rather it seems to argue their point to be right. That would make this discussion pointless. So enjoy... I'm out.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.