Christian Leaders Not Materialistic

Comment by: kim

Hey Jim, sorry. Wasn’t trying to stick my finger in your eye or anything. I certainly believe in the value of criticism, I guess we just disagree on the fairness of this one.

One of the most fascinating critiques of Christianity that I’ve read is Suspicion and Faith: The Religious Uses of Modern Atheism. In it Merold Westphal looks at the writings of Freud, Nietzsche and Marx and asks, “what can the church learn from the criticisms of these gentlemen?” Great book.

Comment by: Siamang

I always look with a wary eye on the big religious leaders. To take the original post’s point saying that among others Billy Graham could hardly be called materialistic.

Billy Graham has built a ministry that takes in over a hundred million dollars a year. They hold over four hundred million dollars in assets. Billy Graham took a salary in 2004 of over four hundred thousand dollars.

Billy Graham is hardly a humble worker toiling in the fields of the lord. This guy is no Johnny Appleseed. He’s the CEO of a world-spanning corporation that turns the dollars given to him into television shows, concert-style appearances, real-estate holdings, internet ministries, magazines, books, motion pictures, radio networks, spiritual vacation retreat resorts… everything under the sun in the world of “spiritual entertainment.”

Only seven million dollars of that 100 million dollars they took in in 2004 went to what they call their “world emergency fund” which is their organization that helps suffering people around the world.

Just seven percent of their income goes to the division that sends help to the troubled parts of the world. But most of that money isn’t going to feed the poor. Nope. 5.7 million of that 7 million went to a television show called “My Hope” that broadcasts sermons in different languages in poor countries.

Another undisclosed chunk of that money rebuilt a Church in Novosibirsk Russia.

How much went to actually providing any food, clothing, housing or medicine for people hit by “world emergencies”? I do not know. Their financial report doesn’t break it out to that level.

I guess when it comes to the Billy Graham Evangilistic Association’s reaction to word emergencies, their motto is “Let them eat scripture.”

Here we have a self-sustaining church-making entertainment corporation. They take your money and make more tv shows with it that ask people for money. Then they build more churches with that money and sell Billy’s books and videos in those churches.

Self-sustaining.

I got all these figures from the BGEA’s annual financial report, available from their website.

I got Billy’s compensation data from Charity Navigator.org

Billy Graham doesn’t live in a house that looks anything like yours or mine. He has a private jet. He gets paid salary, housing allowance, medical care and other compensation to the tune of nearly a half-million dollars a year. His organization has been racked by financial reporting scandal in the past.but he refuses to reveal his personal tax return to the public.

The BGEA does not report the salary they pay to Billy Graham or his son Franklin in their financial reports.

All they do is take the Bible, mix it all up and repackage it. What a great gig. I wish I could make that kind of scratch by merely taking the Bible and selling it to people.

Here’s the cash cow: moooooooooooo!

Comment by: skikid

I think you have a really good point Beta!
I was riding in the car with my mother a couple of months ago and something came on the radio… maybe a Pat Robertson quote (or something similar I honestly dont remember exactly) and her comment was to the effect of “that is why I am athiest”. I think that there are a lot of reasons for her lack of faith but it illistrates a point… the loudest most outspoken voices are the ones that are heard.

Another minor comment… I know who Billy Graham is, who Mother THeresa is and Who the Pope is but the other two on your list I have never heard of.

Comment by: Ir

skikid, those other two are pastors of big churches in America.

Bill Hybels is the senior pastor of Willow Creek Community Church, the second church Hemant visited. (He was not preaching the day Hemant was there, so Hemant has no comments about him).

Rick Warren is pastor of a church in California. He also wrote a book called The Purpose Driven Life which has sold lots of copies - some people (like me, I suppose) have heard of him because of that.

Comment by: r10b

Kim,

I just finished Suspicion and Faith last night! I thought there was much to be learned from those men’s critiques. Unfortunately, I think they were pretty much on the mark. Maybe that is merely an indication of my own level of self-deception.

As to for why one should read books critiquing Christianity there are two reasons:
1. Anti-Christian critics are not afraid to say hurtful (but possibly accurate) things that we need to hear.
2. If we intend to converse with anti-christians we should be prepared.

I highly recommend the book as well.

Comment by: Ir

Kim, thanks! skikid, you’re welcome :)

Comment by: Siamang

Swiss bank account filled with gold bullion. Owns 3 diamond mines in Africa.

He uses them to fund his plan for worldwide dominance via the sale of “Purpose-Driven Life” workbooks, calendars, t-shirts, watches, mousepads, wall-hangings, interactive video-games and plush “Saddleback Rick” dolls.

No truth to the rumor that there are plans to produce a set of Precious Moments dolls in Rick’s likeness. But he is a frequent subject of artistic portraits by the Painter of Light, Thomas Kinkade.

;-)

That’s a joke. Dr. Warren gives 90% of his money to charity.

Comment by: Ir

Beta, you wrote:

I also note an increasing number of Christians who attribute financial success to the favor of God. The idea is not a new one, virtually every society in the history of mankind has said the same.

I think it is only Christians in societies where financial success is possible who attribute financial success to the favor of God.

Christians who are likely to be poor and persecuted their whole lives probably have theology more focused on the hope that they will receive all their rewards in heaven.

Comment by: Siamang

This idea is called “Prosperity Theology.” It reminds me of some of the Prayer of Jabez stuff that was going around recently. “Oh God, please increase my lands, so that I can do your work.”

The Jabez merchandising monster is what I was spoofing in my post above. According to wikipedia they sold “Prayer of Jabez” key chains, mugs, backpacks, Christmas ornaments, scented candles, mouse pads, and a framed artist’s conception of Jabez himself. A line of jewelry was introduced in 2002.

You can’t make stuff up any funnier than real life, if you ask me.

Comment by: Siamang

They didn’t have indulgence keychains. Wierdly they had mousepads.

Comment by: Ir

Wow Siamang, that was an awesome post! How did you sleep? :)

I do understand why you’re afraid. I can’t tell you that nothing you fear is going to happen, nor would I want to try. Please understand that what I’ve written below is not intended to make light of your fears, even though some of what I am saying is “I’m less afraid than you and this is why”. Maybe I am wrong in being less afraid; maybe I am underestimating the dangers out there.

“We are going to reign with Him over all the nations of the world . . . It will be a theocracy with the absolute reign of Christ—with a rod of iron.”
“Anyone who deviates from the Bible “will be tried immediately. No appeal. No need for appeal. There will be immediate punishment. Humanism is the religion and philosophy of the devil. God will use the millennial reign to prove that.”"

I can’t speak for all Christians, but the ones I’ve heard say this are talking about something that won’t happen until Jesus returns. If you don’t think Jesus is ever coming back, that means it will never happen, because the Christians will not try to bring it about by themselves ahead of time. I won’t claim that’s the way every Christian (who would agree with the above) thinks — but it is true of the ones I know.

Here is why I fear, I REALLY fear religion. It has a tendency to unshackle minds from reality, or attract those whos minds have become unshackled already. And so many of them have such violence in their temper.
I think this is a legitimate concern. When a person enters a Bible-believing Christian community, it’s as if they learn “There’s a switch in your brain that is currently set on “Question what you don’t understand” You’ll find it a lot easier to be a Christian if you change the setting to “Accept what you don’t understand”. It kinda has to be on that setting sometimes because of beliefs like God being three-in-one. But should it always be set that way? And if not, when should it be and when shouldn’t it be? I understand the alarm of atheists who discover Christians with their brain on this setting. It seems to the atheists as if Christians have voluntarily relinquished a capacity which can protect people and society from danger and it’s hard to understand why anyone would do that.

I start to wonder… how far of a trail of breadcrumbs is it from creationism, ID pseudoscience… down the slippery slope to UFO’s, Bible Codes, Apocolyptic numerology and a bunch of people wanting to swing the iron rod of Christ down on the heads of “God deniers” like me and my family.

But I really am afraid to ask.

I can see why. Your friends might well say they believe things that you find alarming. After all, they may well be in “accept what I can’t understand” mode. However, some of their beliefs might just be in boxes at the back of the closet, as it were. New Christians tend to be given all these boxes of beliefs when they join a Christian community, but they don’t necessarily act on them in any direct way. For a person to become a Christian, they must have encountered something real and life-changing (from their point of view) but - the whole package of what Christians are told to believe contains a lot of stuff that (in my opinion) is peripheral to daily living. I mean, why does it even matter how old the earth was, to how I treat my spouse and children? In fact, why does it matter to anything in my current life how Jesus is going to rule when he comes back, since that hasn’t happened yet?

But if you want to look in my heart and see where I’m coming from, imagine being me and worrying if my daughter is coming into another era of inquisitions, witch hunts or other systematic elimination of non-believers.
The irony is that Christians have a parallel fear of one day being persecuted [in countries which currently allow freedom of religion] just for being Christians. (Although, they aren’t supposed to fear such things because they believe God will take care of them — but we’re all human and humans do tend to be fearful). What I am saying is, both sides wonder if the other will gain dominance and prevent their children having the freedom they currently have.
Perhaps I’m an idealist, but I don’t think any extremist group could get enough power/votes/influence to take over a country with current freedoms and democracy like the US. has (maybe they aren’t working perfectly but we have more of those things than many countries)

I would like to see the Christian community address whether encouraging people to “accept what you don’t understand” so they can handle some of the Christian teaching, is causing them to accept too much of what they should be questioning and rejecting.

Comment by: Rick

Rick L said: “Who are the people *I* think of as being the “public face” of atheism and is that fair of me?”.

Currently we have people like Richard Dawkins and Michael Shermer who actually act as public faces of atheism. Then there are names like Newdow, and even freethinkers are divided on his stance.

One strikingly notorious atheist dude was Stalin, but he’s been dead for over 5o years now. Atheists rejoiced the day he died.

Peace,
-R

Comment by: Rick

Jim said: ,i.I distinguish between religions(all of them Christianity included) and what it means to follow Jesus.
Totally agreed! A punchline popular among freethought circle goes “If Jesus were to return today, he would be ashamed of the direction the church leaders are leading christianity in”.

Thats one reason why I think OTM totally rules! There should be more like you around, seriously. And I also love the Jesuits and liberation theology. Christianity has some really cool people, too bad the “business model” guys hog all the limelight. You guys should have some Martin Lutheresque coup and distance yourselves from these guys.

Comment by: Peter in Pennsylvania

We’re working on it HARD! You should hear Rick Warren talk (with fire and passion) about what he hopes is the coming “second reformation”. Where those who follow Jesus are known by their deeds, not their creeds.

Of course, we believe we’re “saved” ‘by neither, but by Christ, so if that’s the case… why not act like Him!?!

We’re working on it… Hard…

Comment by: Ir

Neat discussion.

Jim, are you familiar with NT (Tom) Wright’s writing (or have you met him)?

He writes about his vision in The Challenge of Jesus. It seems to me that his vision has a lot in common with yours.

Here’s his official website:

http://www.durham.anglican.org/bishop.htm

This page has lots of his talks on it:

http://www.ntwrightpage.com/

Comment by: KSG

Ir,
To continue your thought, both of the groups of people standing before the king were “believers”, but only one group walked the walk, the other just talked the talk. (Sound familiar?)

Jim said, “We think of it as switching from “beliefism” to “otherliness” “.

Others think of it as the organic church, I think of it as the de-evolution of the church. That is to say, the return to 1st century Christianity.
And the thing that excites me most is that it’s happening both within and without all demoninations (oops, I mean denominations). The Holy Spirit is speaking to whomever will listen.

Comment by: Siamang

Jim wrote:

“I think what is currently called Christianity got into the wrong business about 1700 years ago when it adopted the “religion business” model.”

I agree, and it is unfortunate that I look upon Christianity from the two analogies of either the business world or the natural world. I could also use the political world.

In a good political system, or economic, or natural system, there is something that provides a “check” against flawed ideas/products/animals. If a politician is all rhetoric and yet can’t get the trains to run on time, they get booted out. If a company creates a flawed product, eventually the company has to fix the product or gets either sued or competed out of existence. A lame deer becomes lunch for the mountain lion.

But in religion (in the absense of Jesus coming back to lay the iron rod on folks), there IS no check on wacky ideas.

The most popular ideas ALWAYS win the most converts. Actually the ones that have the best mix of popular ideas AND a culture of continued loyalty, allegiance and further indoctrination. Folks raise the children in the new church, the church grows and fosters loyalty, and nothing shows them to be wrong if indeed they are.

I have yet to see a mechanism in action by which God smites the religions that just plain get it wrong. But He smites mightily the ones that get it boring. (thinking of the shakers) Or the ones that say, “don’t convert new members into the fold.” Having children raised in the faith seems to be the key, which the Shakers didn’t do either.

Instead, religion seems to follow the same model as language. It grows with new ideas, it stays somewhat in tune with the old days, but it continues to grow. Words drop out of the language when people move on into new things to talk about.

I think that an english-speaking Christian today speaking with an english-speaking christian in Chaucer’s time would find that the language had changed just as much as the christianity.

the bible verses would be the same, but the ones on the top-100 list in Geofferey’s time wouldn’t even be similar to the ones today.

Comment by: KSG

Ir,
In the scripture text you gave (Matt 25), the king was talking to Xians. In fact, the whole chapter refers to Xians, the 10 virgins, the 3 servants, the sheep & goats.
Taken literally, it says that there will be a time when we all stand before God and will be judged as either rightious or unrightious not by what we say but by what we’ve done.

I have to add that I’m not saying it is what you do that makes you a Xian. It is clear that our standing in Christ is through faith (not of works, lest any man boast) alone. But the Bible also makes it clear that to our confession of faith we add works (James 2), we display or prove our faith by our works. Matt.25 is saying that as well.

Comment by: KSG

Ir
Sorry to answer with a question but, do you believe that all mankind has a chance of heaven based strictly on the good they have done: Or do you believe that you are “going to heaven” based upon your relationship with Jesus Christ (salvation by faith through grace)?

My interpretation of Mark 25 is through the filter of salvation by faith through grace, so when I read the story of Jesus and his interaction with his fellow believers (after all, the Jewish nation professed to believe in a Messiah), I assume that he is in fact talking to believers (Israel being a type of the church).

Comment by: Jim Henderson

Ir
Good for you

Comment by: Ir

Jim, thanks (again)

KSG:

the method you are espousing seems to cast a sceptical shadow over the Bible. Could you explain this more clearly?

I’m not sure that I’m espousing anything definite enough to explain more clearly; but I can try to explain what bothers me. When Christians say “I believe the Bible” what they seem to mean is “I believe the theological framework that has been taught to me”. Why do I say that? Because when they come to a passage like Matthew 25, their approach is to figure out how to reconcile the passage with their theological framework. Thus, the Bible doesn’t predominate; the theological framework does. The Bible text has to answer to the theological framework rather than vice versa.

What do you believe about salvation by faith through grace?

I believe that it’s hard to reconcile with Jesus’ words in passages such as the Sheep and Goats.

I’m not trying to be flippant — just honest.

Comment by: KSG

Thanks Ir,

Is the concept of “salvation by faith through grace” a theological or biblical concept?