You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: When a Preacher Calls Out the Banksters.

in #money7 years ago

I am not into organized religion but I challenge your thinking respectfully. A person can have a good word of encouragement for people, help them, and still make good money having his own business or another job besides his pastor duties. Jesus said the poor will always be with you. Meaning that some ppl will always be poor because they lack discipline, etc. So, if you have a drunk who never works in your congregation and always spend every penny on booze, the preacher isn't allowed to have a penny because of the lifestyle of an unwise addict in his church? And addicts have been abundant in today's church. What about the pastors who minister to the homeless, orphans, etc. Are they not allowed to have a home or family either? How far does this line of thinking go? Just a thought and challenge, not trying to offend.

Sort:  

Do you know the part where he tells the rich man to give everything away and follow him? I don't think I need to say more.

Absolutely, I know that scripture. Did you realize that he said that to a rich, young ruler, not a preacher? Lots of ppl don't acknowledge the fact that he told this to one particular person, not everyone. I think it's weird that ppl miss the point. Not everyone is a lover of money/things (addicted to money/stuff). So, a person without resources can't help others who are lacking also. I read a book that talks about a preacher who was powerful in The Lord and he fed lots of starving but didn't give himself enough food. So, he dies and the starving ppl are there now left with no one to feed them. See, the poor will always be with you. If Jesus says to YOU give it all, you'd better give it all. He said it's hard for a rich man to enter into Heaven but not impossible. In others words rich ppl aren't bound to Hell just because they have resources. The Lord looks at the heart not the physical. It seems the rich young ruler loved his possessions more than The Lord. This is obvious. One time I had 2 vehicles, one for me and one for my husband. We had 2 little babies. On our way to church one day, we saw a lady walking down the street carrying groceries. We picked her up and took her home. She told us she had 5 kids and needed to get groceries. After we dropped her off, we decided we would give her our best car because she was in more need than us, right? We went on to church and prayed The Lord would show is if we were thinking the right way, even though this is really what we wanted to do. Before we got back home we felt confident giving her our car was not The Lord. The next day, our other car broke down and we were already struggling and scraping by. My husband would have had no way to get to work, etc., if we had given that lady our car. I don't know why she was in that situation, who knows maybe she sold her car for drugs and would have done the same with ours. We learned a valuable lesson that day, being generous and giving is great when The Lord is in it but if He's not we could be killing ourselves or enabling addicts. It should always be about what He tells us not what someone with a religious mindset says. I have been homeless and understand that the less I have, the less I can help. Thanks for bringing up that scripture. One of my favorite vloggers has been taking that out of context, too. 👀

Look, I think getting into a religious debate is not for me, just google Mr. Rod Parsley and see what kind of lifestyle he lives, then get back to me, oh and it's all from the church he leads. These guys are con men.

I know who Rod is and I am not defending him or coming against him. I do try to give when The Lord tells me to and if He tells me to give to Rod, I will, but I won't if He doesn't want me to. He looks at their hearts. I just have to trust Him and sometimes that's been hard, but that's part of following Him. Ya know. ☺Thanks @gduran for your responses. ☺Have a great day!

"he tells the rich man to give everything away and follow him? "

That was not a prescription indicating that wealth keeps a person from going to Heaven. 1 Timothy 6:10 states that, "For the love of money is the root of all evil." Money is not evil in and of itself. The evil is in loving money (or anything else) more than one loves God, which makes that thing an idol. Having wealth doesn't keep one from entering Heaven, but because of man's sin nature most people are too susceptible to greed to not love money more than God once they acquire a large quantity of it because they are short-sighted enough to think that money is salvation.

Like many of you have stated here, I agree that organized religion too often is a failure. However, I have been blessed enough to have discovered a church that understands that it's purpose is not to milk the congregations wallet, but rather to see that an honest effort is made to help each person attending understand their opportunity to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and that the church is only there to facilitate that through fellowship and worship. After having given up on "organized religion" decades ago I stumbled upon a church that "gets it" and it has made all the difference. There are also others out there, though few and far between. It's worth keeping an open mind about it.

Matthew 19:24
Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." We've got to get one thing straight either Jesus meant what he was saying or it is all up to how each individual wants to interpret his word. When he said a parable he explained its meaning, I take it when he didn't explain something it was meant to mean exactly what he said.
And of course money can't be evil, it is a material thing, no soul that I know of, so it is the human being who is wicked for example a preacher who lives the high life by preaching what he doesn't live.

If you think I was defending "a preacher who lives the high life by preaching what he doesn't live," then you didn't understand anything about my reply at all. That is not what I said.

Ok, I didn't understand, now let me know what you think about the first part of my answer to you.