What does prosperity mean to the Body of Christ.  Does it has any place in teaching, is it

for the body, should it be taught or should it be ignored.  What is biblical prosperity?

What does the bible has to say about this topic?

Views: 992

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Here we go. Brother I am not relining on what any Professional Theologian thinks. In fact I have just stated the facts of the text.
It is because I read Greek and Hebrew So you incorrect when you write: You criticize my eisegesis yet you misquote John 1:39 (KJV), saying "Come, and you will see," when the text clearly says "Come and see.” There are two points that I’d like to make
1. The KJV reads come and see
2. The other translation I think I use the NIV says come and you will see.
So what we have is a translation problem. I will do my best to help you understand the reason that the KJV got it wrong!

Let's read the text in the Greek itself
1:39 λεγει αυτοις ερχεσθε και οψεσθε ηλθαν ουν και ειδαν που μενει και παρ αυτω εμειναν την ημεραν εκεινην ωρα ην ως δεκατη

Now as you can see (You can’t see) there is a problem, the text reads as so:
John 1:39 He said to them, come they came and see, saw where he dwelt, and with him abode day: that hour it was about the tenth.

So we(people that translate the passage for themselves) must make the passage read smoother.
Thus the (KJV) being translated for “Latin” not Greek gives a very good reading of the text but read this

39 He said to them, "Come, and you will see." So they came and saw where He was staying; and they stayed with Him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. NASU is better
So it is not as you say traditional thinking shape scripture to fit a doctrine, but the clear teaching of Scripture.

So if you can’t read the text in the original languages than you’re not relining on someone else translation.
Let me make this clear eisegesis is not a good thing it bad very bad. That’s how you get his house when the passage says something else. Please reconsider you reading and understand that there are rules to reading literature.

You make fun of my education and in the same breath say you want training, I do not fine it funny when Blacks put down those of us with education as somehow we are the bad guys. You claim that the Body of Christ is in bondage to the teachings of the traditional church. Which church would that be? The Church that Christ paid the price for with His blood or you view. Just a question.
Brother Pastor,

First of all, let me apologize if I offended you. You took a swing (fairly) at me by lumping me in with "prosperity preachers" and I merely parried your jab.

Second, it was you who made light of my lack of training with your reference to my usage of Strong's. I do, indeed, desire training in Greek and Hebrew -- this will help me read and understand the original text without relying on man's translation or interpretation.

Far be it from me to berate any man who seeks to educate himself. In addition to my labor in the Kingdom, I am a software engineer and a former columnist and radio talk-show host. I do not see you as a "bad guy," you are a man of God and, contrary to what you may think, I esteem you as such.

I am somewhat taken aback that you would even insinuate I would put down any Black American who seeks and attains education. I know the struggles endured and price paid by those who gave their blood, sweat, tears, and even lives so I may enjoy the life that I and my family do.

Third, your tone is condescending (which is frequently the case with those who have attended the "mainline" theological seminaries). Many -- and if this is not your case, I apologize -- treat preachers and pastors (such as myself) who do not have the education they have as somehow inferior. I know just as many men of God who are mighty in spite of education as because of it!

Fourth, you say you state the facts of the text. I contend I do the same. The scripture, itself, does not fully support either of our positions. I take the stance that I do because God given me an assignment to preach liberty to the captives -- of both sin and religion (John 8:36, 2 Corinthians 3:17).

Everything I preach and teach must point back to Jesus. And, Brother, I press toward the mark to ensure that when I open my mouth or put pen to paper that I empty out myself that the light of Jesus can be manifest and magnified!

The bottom line is this, Brother Pastor, it is no more the will of God for any of His children to live in lack any more than it is your will that any of your children to live in lack. God is the God of abundance and He wants us to experience this AS OUR SOULS PROSPER (3 John 2).

There is only one church. However, there is a great deal of bondage heaped on it by the traditions of men. We must work toward lifting these burdens so the church can be what Jesus is calling it to be.

Most of all, I LOVE YOU! We may not agree on everything, but we can agree there is One Way, and His name is Jesus!
Brother there is no need to apologize, you did not offend me. You’re right I did mention you as a prosperity, this is based on your own words “And I preach prosperity only as it is presented in scripture (3 John 2, John 10:10, Matthew 10:29-30)” written just one day ago. So that makes you a prosperity preacher.

In Your second point you write: “Second, it was you who made light of my lack of training with your reference to my usage of Strong's. I do, indeed, desire training in Greek and Hebrew”
My brother the whole point of you going to your Strong’s was to try and make you point better, the problem was that it did not work. Sorry if I made you feel that you were less than I, it was not my true intent.

You also stated that “I am somewhat taken aback that you would even insinuate I would put down any Black American who seeks and attains education. I know the struggles endured and price paid by those who gave their blood, sweat, tears, and even lives so I may enjoy the life that I and my family do.”

So if I missed understood you please forgive me. But I read this statement by you “It is refreshing to find a man of God who has done his homework. Since you (fair enough) suggested that my eisegesis is that of "prosperity teachers," might I (humorously) suggest yours rings of the typical cemetery, I mean seminary graduate!” That was a very fair shot at me in light of this discussion.

You state that my tone is condescending it is not condescending because you lack training but you and I don’t mean you personal but preachers that have no true understanding of the Bible (not sayings that you don’t) try to convince us that we are wrong in our understanding of the text.

Next you write that “Fourth, you say you state the facts of the text.” This is a technical term that I use out of habit. The process that I use in to understand the Bible is Bible Study Methods. There are five steps but I’m still in the first. So let me give you and overview.

1. Observation: This were we just look at the facts of the text.
2. Interpretation: This were we just look at the meaning of the text (not what I think it means but what the passage met to the readers at the time they were reading.)
3. Application: I do we apply this to our life.

So when you say that
The bottom line is this, Brother Pastor, it is no more the will of God for any of His children to live in lack any more than it is your will that any of your children to live in lack. God is the God of abundance and He wants us to experience this AS OUR SOULS PROSPER (3 John 2).
The problem you have is this in not the meaning of the text.

3Jn 1-2 The elder to the beloved Gaius, whom I clove in truth.
2 Beloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers. 3
You can’t change the fact that this was written to Gaius not you and I.
So what does it mean I get to that point later. Be Blessed
Brother Pastor,
Once again, I have great respect and love for you. I stand by my statement that it is not God's will that any of His children live in bondage, whether it be sin, sickness, or religion.

In support of where God has assigned me, I submit the following scriptures:

Joshua 1:8
Psalm 37:4
Psalm 103:2-3
Psalm 84:11
Matthew 19:29
Mark 11:23
John 10:10

Now, contrary to what is taught by many in the prosperity crowd, I do not subscribe to the foolishness that proffers "everyone will be a millionaire." Unfortunately, far too many (in the Body of Christ) would consume it on their own lusts.

We may have to agree to disagree. I am okay with that. I thank you for the "iron sharpening" and pray God's Very Best for you!

Blessed Regards,
Pastor Day
Okay! Read the Book of Jude it will help you in this matter. Study it, Practice it, Teach it. Ezra 7:10

Rabi does not mean teacher, it is a title that means MASTER thus is only fit to address Jesus..


Outline of Biblical Usage

1) master, chief, prince

2) Rabboni is a title of honour Mary used to address Jesus

To whom are you writting?

...it is a title that means MASTER thus is only fit to address Jesus..

 

The disciples of John the Baptist called him "Rabbi": John 3:26.

rhábbi [rabbi], rhabbouní [master]

A. Judaism.

1. The term ‎rab ‎denotes one who holds a respected position, e.g., an official. It is used by an inferior to a superior. Students use it in addressing their teachers, but it may also be used for the Messiah or for God as Lord of the world.

2. The use for teachers goes back to the second century B.C. Students follow their teachers with respectful obedience. When qualified to teach, they themselves are given the title, which the people as a whole also uses. It occurs on many inscriptions from Palestine, Syria, Cyprus, and Italy.

 

B. The NT.

1. In the NT ‎rhábbi ‎occurs only in the Gospels. Mt 23:7 censures the scribes for desiring the title. The Baptist is called ‎rhábbi ‎in Jn 3:26.

2. Jesus is called ‎rhábbi ‎by Peter in Mk 9:5 and Judas in 14:45. The term ‎didáskalos ‎in Mk 4:38; 9:17, etc. has the same force. John explains the use in 1:38. Jesus is addressed as ‎rhábbi ‎in 1:49; 3:2; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8. ‎rhabbouní ‎in Mk 10:51 and Jn 20:16 is an alternative form. The use of ‎rhábbi ‎shows that Jesus is viewed as a teacher by his disciples and the people. He differs from an ordinary scribe in that he chooses his own disciples and teaches authoritatively. Since the disciples never become rabbis as Jesus is, he also has a unique status as their ‎kýrios ‎(Mt 8:25; 20:33).

3. As the Palestinian tradition becomes less prominent, ‎rhábbi ‎does not occur in other Christian writings.

It's funny how people talk about prosperity, and the Lord said that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom....

Prosperity is a cardinal issue... Spiritual people accept what the Lord has given them....

This whole thread is vain...
One question for EVERYONE who is opposed to the concept of Biblical prosperity: Have you, PERSONALLY, sold all you have for the Kingdom? If not, your opposition is futile and your argument is moot. Furthermore, the argument against prosperity lacks Biblical precedent.
I know that it is not right to answer a question by a question, but you are wrong because "where is it in the Bible that we must take a vow of porverity? It is not there, so that dog does not hunt! Sorry!

RSS

© 2024   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service