It is not wrong for Gods servants to be wealthy!!

[pointer]

I am not going to continue going in circles with you. It is not a profitable use of my time to debate with someone who does not even possess the integrity own up to his words.

I own up to my own, but not to straw men, shiloh. You cannot argue against what I actually wrote.

I will not respond to you any futher in this thread.

You've 'run out of road', and have no option about that.

[Kabowd]

I quite agree that the subject of the Torah is hardly appropriate in this thread, and that the original post should not have been made. But it was, and it was allowed to stand. However, it is very suspicious indeed when parties make objection only after a long debate on the issue, as they may be parties who simply do not like the conclusion that has been reached from it.

The original post about the Torah was mine, and it was made to support the notion that from the beginning the Bible does not teach how to gain personal wealth, and that it does not serve as a personal success manual. I was simply bringing to the discussion the biblical response to the "prosperity" doctrine. You are the one who took off in another direction and made a bunch ridiculous assertions that you could not defend and then attempted to deflect attention away from your impotent arguments.

My post about the Torah was in keeping with the subject matter of the thread, yours were not. I simply responded to your sloppy, anti-Torah "theology."

This reminds me of a question I had, shiloh. Earlier you were responding about the Proverbs, and talked about how those weren't "promises" made across the board (which I agree). I've also seen people refer to Pentecost (and the book of Acts), claiming that the events that occurred there should happen to all believers....to which I've seen you and AK respond saying that these were "descriptive texts" and not "prescriptive texts". Can you explain in a little more detail what this means? The reason I bring this up here, is because this seems to be what people do alot of the time. They take an event that occurs in scripture and want to apply it to all believers. How is a person to know what are actually "promises" and things that should occur in the life of all believers, and what were specific events or promises made to a specific person/group?

Re-posting this in case shiloh missed it.....

Yes, people do that alot. They see something that happened in the Bible, and they automatically assume that God wants this for everyone. They make a doctrine out of events in the Bible, and then expect God to do the same for them, and it is a very bogus way of interpreting the Bible. I have known people who believe that we should be so spiritual, that our shadows should heal people, I have known people who thought that the cloud of the Shekinah that filled the Temple should appear in church services.

I have also seen people who disregard the fact that God made promises to certain people in the Bible, for a certain time, and then try to apply it to themselves. This is the big problem in the prosperity movement. They take promises made to national Israel, and try to apply these to the church, and specifically to themselves as individuals. It is a very grotesque form of hermeneutics.

As for the Proverbs. These same practitioners of the Prosperity doctrine do not differentiate between a proverb and a promise. They simply see something they like and claim it for themselves, and what is worse they try to obligate God to something He never promised. When believers do this and don't get results, it damages them spiritually. It is very sad. Of course when it doesn't work the prosperity teachers blame them for not having enough faith, or not planting enough seeds. That only heaps up more condemnation.

It is really sick, the whole thing. It is why we need more instruction on Bible interpretation in churches today. The Prosperity movement would die a very quick death, if people were educated in rightly dividing the Word of Truth.

Thank you, that's exactly what I was talking about. So what do you say to people who do that? How do you educate them on it? Are all promises in Scripture for specific people unless otherwise noted? How are we to determine how to interpret promises accurately?

[Guest shiloh357]

Thank you, that's exactly what I was talking about. So what do you say to people who do that? How do you educate them on it? Are all promises in Scripture for specific people unless otherwise noted? How are we to determine how to interpret promises accurately?

Well it depends on how entrenched they are in the prosperity doctrines.

Promises like other Scriptures have both a sender and a recipient. Just like the both addresses on the front of an envelope.

I see two really glaring problems in the way people approach the promises in Scripture. First of all, it seems that some people grab promises without determining if it applies to them or not. The Prosperity movement for example, latches on to the words of Deut. 28-1-14. These were promises given to national Israel, not to individuals. God promised a general prosperity and environment of blessing to the nation of Israel, but never promised that no single Israeli would never be poor, sick and so forth. This is evidenced by the fact that the Torah gives clear instructions regarding the treatment of the poor Israelites in their midst. They were told to leave corners of the fields for the poor to glean, and that they were not abuse the poor in courts of law, but were to be fair in their treatment. Such commandments would have been unnecessary if God's promises were specific to each person and not national/civil in nature.

Furthermore, these blessings were based upon obedience to the commandments of God, not on the basis of simply being Israelites. This part in v. 1 of Deut 28 is what the Prosperity folks overlook. They claim that these are "covenant" blessings, that belong to a person on the basis of the covenant. They fail to understand the relationship of the Mosaic to the Abrahamic covenant. The Abrahamic covenant was an unconditional covenant of promise. The Mosaic Covenant was a conditional covenant based upon obedience. It was a covenant of protection in that it protects the promise. The Mosaic covenant showed the Israelites how to live in the promise. Their enjoyment of the promise is conditional upon their obedience.

The second problem I see is the selectivity with which they appropriate these promises. They ignore the demands God makes for the appropriation of the promises, and they only appropriate the "good" promises. They only appropriate the promises that appear as "blessings." They want the blessings, but not the commandments that these blessings are conditional upon. Of course those commandments are "done away with," we are told. God expected the children of Israel to avoid certain types of animals for food, and to keep the Sabbath, and other such regulations in order to enjoy the blessings described in Deut. 28. We are told that those commandments are done away with in Christ. OK... So the are the blessings. If the commandment upon which the blessing was conditional is done away with, the blessing is no longer valid because the condition upon which that blessing existed in the first place no longer exists.

The Bible is not a smorgasbord. We cannot pick and choose according to our tastes. We cannot throw out God's commandments as "Old Testament" on the one hand, while trying to avail ourselves of "Old Testament" blessings, on the other. It simply does not work that way. We need to have an internally consistent hermeneutic approach.

The way to understand the promises properly, is to read the "address." We need to determine first who the intended audience was. If the Scripture allows for a wider application, then we need to determine that from the text. It is not hard. We simply need to read before and after any given passage. It helps us to determine the author, audience and the line of thought.

[Kabowd]

Thank you, that's exactly what I was talking about. So what do you say to people who do that? How do you educate them on it? Are all promises in Scripture for specific people unless otherwise noted? How are we to determine how to interpret promises accurately?

Well it depends on how entrenched they are in the prosperity doctrines.

Promises like other Scriptures have both a sender and a recipient. Just like the both addresses on the front of an envelope.

I see two really glaring problems in the way people approach the promises in Scripture. First of all, it seems that some people grab promises without determining if it applies to them or not. The Prosperity movement for example, latches on to the words of Deut. 28-1-14. These were promises given to national Israel, not to individuals. God promised a general prosperity and environment of blessing to the nation of Israel, but never promised that no single Israeli would never be poor, sick and so forth. This is evidenced by the fact that the Torah gives clear instructions regarding the treatment of the poor Israelites in their midst. They were told to leave corners of the fields for the poor to glean, and that they were not abuse the poor in courts of law, but were to be fair in their treatment. Such commandments would have been unnecessary if God's promises were specific to each person and not national/civil in nature.

Furthermore, these blessings were based upon obedience to the commandments of God, not on the basis of simply being Israelites. This part in v. 1 of Deut 28 is what the Prosperity folks overlook. They claim that these are "covenant" blessings, that belong to a person on the basis of the covenant. They fail to understand the relationship of the Mosaic to the Abrahamic covenant. The Abrahamic covenant was an unconditional covenant of promise. The Mosaic Covenant was a conditional covenant based upon obedience. It was a covenant of protection in that it protects the promise. The Mosaic covenant showed the Israelites how to live in the promise. Their enjoyment of the promise is conditional upon their obedience.

The second problem I see is the selectivity with which they appropriate these promises. They ignore the demands God makes for the appropriation of the promises, and they only appropriate the "good" promises. They only appropriate the promises that appear as "blessings." They want the blessings, but not the commandments that these blessings are conditional upon. Of course those commandments are "done away with," we are told. God expected the children of Israel to avoid certain types of animals for food, and to keep the Sabbath, and other such regulations in order to enjoy the blessings described in Deut. 28. We are told that those commandments are done away with in Christ. OK... So the are the blessings. If the commandment upon which the blessing was conditional is done away with, the blessing is no longer valid because the condition upon which that blessing existed in the first place no longer exists.

The Bible is not a smorgasbord. We cannot pick and choose according to our tastes. We cannot throw out God's commandments as "Old Testament" on the one hand, while trying to avail ourselves of "Old Testament" blessings, on the other. It simply does not work that way. We need to have an internally consistent hermeneutic approach.

The way to understand the promises properly, is to read the "address." We need to determine first who the intended audience was. If the Scripture allows for a wider application, then we need to determine that from the text. It is not hard. We simply need to read before and after any given passage. It helps us to determine the author, audience and the line of thought.

Thank you, that helps! (psst..you should check out the Hosea topic in Doctrinal, I think you could add to the discussion there ).

[Artemus Prime]

Well said, Shiloh, well said indeed! Scripture can never mean what it never meant. We have to know what a particular passage meant to its original audience before we can attempt to imply what it means to us today.

[anitarose]

Hey, ya'll......

Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God

[Smalcald]

I quite agree that the subject of the Torah is hardly appropriate in this thread, and that the original post should not have been made. But it was, and it was allowed to stand. However, it is very suspicious indeed when parties make objection only after a long debate on the issue, as they may be parties who simply do not like the conclusion that has been reached from it.

The original post about the Torah was mine, and it was made to support the notion that from the beginning the Bible does not teach how to gain personal wealth, and that it does not serve as a personal success manual. I was simply bringing to the discussion the biblical response to the "prosperity" doctrine. You are the one who took off in another direction and made a bunch ridiculous assertions that you could not defend and then attempted to deflect attention away from your impotent arguments.

My post about the Torah was in keeping with the subject matter of the thread, yours were not. I simply responded to your sloppy, anti-Torah "theology."

This reminds me of a question I had, shiloh. Earlier you were responding about the Proverbs, and talked about how those weren't "promises" made across the board (which I agree). I've also seen people refer to Pentecost (and the book of Acts), claiming that the events that occurred there should happen to all believers....to which I've seen you and AK respond saying that these were "descriptive texts" and not "prescriptive texts". Can you explain in a little more detail what this means? The reason I bring this up here, is because this seems to be what people do alot of the time. They take an event that occurs in scripture and want to apply it to all believers. How is a person to know what are actually "promises" and things that should occur in the life of all believers, and what were specific events or promises made to a specific person/group?

Re-posting this in case shiloh missed it.....

Yes, people do that alot. They see something that happened in the Bible, and they automatically assume that God wants this for everyone. They make a doctrine out of events in the Bible, and then expect God to do the same for them, and it is a very bogus way of interpreting the Bible. I have known people who believe that we should be so spiritual, that our shadows should heal people, I have known people who thought that the cloud of the Shekinah that filled the Temple should appear in church services.

I have also seen people who disregard the fact that God made promises to certain people in the Bible, for a certain time, and then try to apply it to themselves. This is the big problem in the prosperity movement. They take promises made to national Israel, and try to apply these to the church, and specifically to themselves as individuals. It is a very grotesque form of hermeneutics.

As for the Proverbs. These same practitioners of the Prosperity doctrine do not differentiate between a proverb and a promise. They simply see something they like and claim it for themselves, and what is worse they try to obligate God to something He never promised. When believers do this and don't get results, it damages them spiritually. It is very sad. Of course when it doesn't work the prosperity teachers blame them for not having enough faith, or not planting enough seeds. That only heaps up more condemnation.

It is really sick, the whole thing. It is why we need more instruction on Bible interpretation in churches today. The Prosperity movement would die a very quick death, if people were educated in rightly dividing the Word of Truth.

I don't think it would. It offers the tradition of what hucksters have offered since the beginning, something for nothing. The idea that we could pray for wealth, big homes, fancy cars and we would get these if we just plant some seeds with Creflo Dollar or the Orenstein

[Guest yod]

It all depends on "how" someone got wealthy and what they do then....

[Guest shiloh357]

I don't think it would. It offers the tradition of what hucksters have offered since the beginning, something for nothing. The idea that we could pray for wealth, big homes, fancy cars and we would get these if we just plant some seeds with Creflo Dollar or the Orenstein

[anitarose]

Now, here is something to ponder: Should a person who is getting help from the government put money in the offering plate? Sometimes I felt guilty if I did, and guilty if I didn't. I had to let the guilt go and let God handle it.

You know what, Pet? I look at it this way....God gave you the ability to go and get help from the gov't....He deserves a 10th of it...it's income, right?

Although I will admit it's hard to tithe on food stamps....

LOL

Anita