Asbury Theological Seminary
TH701 O1 - Spring 2014
Contemporary Theology
Professor: Dr. Joseph Okello
THEOLOGY OF PROSPERITY
The homegrown theological attitude that has swept across America and exported around the globe is part of what is referred to as a theology of success, which “fits in as well to the materialistic, achievement-oriented climate of the North America” (Smith) of the last four decades. A good definition of the teaching of the theology of prosperity was presented by the Lausanne Theology Working Group as “the teaching that believers have a right to the blessings of health and wealth and that they can obtain these blessings through positive confessions of faith and the ‘sowing of seeds’ through the faithful payments of tithes and offerings” (Lausanne Theology Working Group). The leaders of the movement model what they preach for their followers. “They live in opulent settings, drive top-of-the-line automobiles, and wear the latest and most expensive designer clothing. And they teach all who will listen that all these blessings may be theirs, as well” (Lausanne Theology Working Group).
Prosperity teaching is a phenomenon that cuts across denominational barriers (Lausanne Theology Working Group), but it has been within Western Neo-Pentecostal Christianity where it has been developed. Its roots can be found in the “Faith Movement many may recognize as a form of Pentecostal Christianity by a variety of other labels, such as the Gospel of Wealth and
Wilma I. Reyes|Theology
Health, Prosperity Theology, Name it and Claim it, Seed-Faith, Word of Faith, Abundant Life, or the more derisive Blab it and Grab it.” (Hladky) Some say this movement had its beginnings in 1979 when the ‘International Convention of Faith Ministries’ gathered a large number of churches who proclaimed this point of view (Smith). And this date could very well mark the initial explosion of its influence in the United States through global television ministries like Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) and The Word Network. However, when we take a closer look at its historical background, “its worldview is deeply indebted to a 19th century American religious movement called “New Thought” (Hladky). “New Thought was marked by the belief that proper use of the mind could control reality, including all the experiences and circumstances of an individual life.” (Hladky) Among its main adherents were teachers, writers, and thinkers, including Phineas Quimby, Emma Curtis Hopkins, Charles Fillmore, Mary Bakker Eddy, and Norman Vincent Peale. With very few exceptions, its adherents identified as Christians and focused their theology on the Scriptures, as they believed to be “uncovering Christian truth and even engaged in extensive mission work” (Hladky). From the New Thought influence, four major denominations were formed; The Unity Church, Divine Science, Christian Science, and the United Church of Religious Science (Hladky). Its primary focus was “on mental and bodily healing. But by the turn of the century, healers increasingly targeted poverty as a mental affliction, teaching that God intended all people to be prosperous.” (Hladky)
But it was through the rise of religious broadcasting, first through Robert Schuller’s ‘The Hour of Power’, and the establishment of religious networks that the Faith Movement sparked
Page 2 of 11
Wilma I. Reyes|Theology
3 of 11 and spread like wildfire. “Faith Pentecostalism has dominated the airwaves and has relied on media technologies to spread its message” making it part of our religious landscape (Hladky). It is important to highlight that “the message of positive confession which stresses the magical power of words harnessed by the individual, suits a medium that is limited to visual and oral expressions.” (Hladky). More recently, New Thought has found a non-Christian adherent with a lot of power and outreach through Oprah Winfrey, who in “February 8th, 2007 revealed the secret to success, wealth, health, and happiness. The secret, as it turned out, was a book called The Secret by Rhonda Byrnes.” (Hladky) This New York Times bestselling novel and related film teaches “the law of attraction… which can be applied to any problem or goal. To attract money, Byrne and her contributors encourage people to believe that they are rich, to assert that they are wealthy and able to afford things, even when they can’t, and to give away money so that the universe can flood them with exponential returns.” (Hladky) Today’s Faith leaders draw parallel conclusions from Christian Scriptures like Proverbs 13:22, Deuteronomy 8:18, and Romans 4:17. Believers are taught that they can unleash the supernatural power of words through the positive confession of the Scriptures. The implications behind this message is that “true faithfulness leads to prosperous living.” (Withrow)
The extensive variety of characters that fill up the airwaves cater to the widely multiracial audiences in general, but its ideas and claims of material benefits also appeal to the marginalized. It is precisely this aspect that makes of the gospel of prosperity a dangerous one. Salvadoran theologian Emilio Antonio Núñez Castañeda, argues that the prosperity gospel has two fatal
problems: generalization and reductionism (Salinas). Prosperity Gospel’s purely materialistic emphasis generalizes and overlooks the diverse factors that affect today’s economic, social, and political situations. It generalizes the message of the Bible by establishing that it “guarantees economic abundance and social mobility” (Salinas). When the preachers of this “gospel” are faced with the question of why all Christians are not millionaires, their generalized answer is “something must be wrong with their Christian life since every believer who has enough faith and lives according to it will enjoy material riches.” Global church theologian Philip Jenkins asserts that “prosperity teachings so exalt success as to pour scorn on the poor as stubborn infidels who have evidently refused to seek God’s aid. ” This version of the gospel where “faith leads to tithing, and tithing ignites prosperity” makes of churches a place where “you have to pay to play – and to win.” (Jenkins). The danger in this generalization is that it overlooks the real socio-economic and political panorama of the world, making of the poor a meer captive audience of the imperialistic Western Christianity views brought on by globalization. Liza Withrow, associate professor of congregational studies at Methodist Theological School in Ohio, defines globalization as “the compression of the world, referring both to increasing sociocultural interdependence and to rapidly expanding political and cultural consciousness”. (Withrow)
According to Withrow, Western Christianity “sees themselves as the economic saviors of the world” and by making use of this view of ‘economic success’, they portray Christianity as a ‘consumer good,’ rather than a response to God’s call to love neighbor and live holy lives.” (Withrow) The danger is that this culture of commodification of Christianity equates economics
4 of 11
5 of 11 with human well-being, and hence, defines human beings as ‘consumers.’ In this way, the prosperity gospel’s use of the market system—where God rewards the talented and successful with further material success diverts attention from the real issues that perpetuate poverty in our world, such as inequality in the “distribution of goods, the power differentials between transnational corporations and local workers, and human dignity.” (Withrow) In short, the notions of the prosperity gospel makes of humanity a commodity, which produces new forms of total control over peoples’ lives. These culturally, politically, and economically sanctioned forms of slavery are also sanctioned by a religious system for the sake of the economic governance of the world, with the Western World as the main player and puppeteer. Today, through external debt, the West keeps poor nations bound to them in a form of slavery. “Western countries have entered a neocolonial era, where former colonies that have political freedom today do not necessarily have economic freedom as a result.” (Withrow) The problem behind this trend is that “religious leaders promote the establishment of a “benign imperial world order,” representing international morality; where the United States would bring a better life and superior values to the rest of the world.” (Withrow) In this aspect, “prosperity teaching does not provide a helpful or biblical response to the poverty of the people among whom it flourishes… it vastly enriches those who preach it but leaves multitudes no better off than before, with the added burden of disappointed hopes. While emphasizing various alleged spiritual or demonic causes of poverty, it gives little or no attention to those causes that are economic and political, including injustice,
The second fatal problem of the prosperity gospel, presented by Nuñez Castañeda, is that “prosperity gospel suffers of reductionism mostly in its interpretation of the Scriptures.”
(Salinas) The faith movement grounds its concept in a highly literal interpretation of certain bible verses, divorcing them from their biblical context and correct hermeneutical analysis, distorting the biblical message of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and bringing in key aspects of First Century Gnosticism’s dualistic thought. “This involves a belief in two mutually exclusive realms the spiritual and the material…all humans begin in the lower, or material realm with the hope of moving upward to the spiritual plane. Such upward mobility can be achieved only through the acquisition of special knowledge from an external agency.” (Smith) A close look at the Scriptural record shows us that “although some among Jesus’ followers had material goods (Lk. 8:1-3; Acts 2:43-47; 4:32-35) the great majority were poor (1 Cor. 1:25-29).” (Salinas)
What the bible does teach is that the “whole world is under the Evil One (1 John 5:19), that evil reigns everywhere, and that nature has been affected by sin (Gn. 3:17, 18; Ro. 8:18-23). Many people are dominated by insatiable greed, and they actively further the social injustices in the world” (Salinas). “It is wrong to infer from prosperity that God is favorable toward us, and from suffering that God is angry.” (Bucer-Beza and Calvin) “Prosperity gospel is reductionist when it overlooks the biblical texts that talk not about riches but rather of the poverty God permits… the ultimate example being the Lord Jesus who did not even have a place to lay his head (Lk. 9:58).
6 of 11 exploitation, unfair international trade practices, etc… thus tends to victimize the poor by making them feel that their poverty is their own fault.” (Lausanne Theology Working Group)
… Jesus did not invite Christians to always have physical health, professional and social success, a problem-free home, and lots of money. He invited his hearers to take up their cross and to follow him. How far? Even unto death.” (Salinas) This is all a matter of the heart, and where we have our treasure, according to Matthew 6:21. “Prosperity often inebriates people, so that they take delight in their own vanities. Instead of leading to gratitude… this indulgent liberality is abused; prosperity becomes its own kind of prison that deprives us of God’s greatest gifts”
(Bucer-Beza and Calvin).
In his book A Different Gospel, D.R. McConnell indicates that this prosperity mindset interprets the cross of Jesus in at least three different ways. “First, it subverts the demand of the cross for self-denial; second, reduces God to a means to an end; and third, its mindset is focused on the things of this world as the sign of God’s approval and the means of God’s blessing” (McConnell). The question that now rises is not so much what the bible says about money and prosperity, for it is clear in its message once it has undergone correct biblical interpretation. The focus must be one of accountability to God’s world and to each other in a world where the majority of the population lives in poverty and where natural resources are abused to no end.
“The church finds itself in a position to make a choice: it can continue to strive to have a voice that works in conjunction with socioeconomic powers such as governments and transitional corporations, or it can turn to prophetic work on the margins of society.” (Withrow) If the church chooses to be the prophetic voice it has been called to be, “it will find freedom to critique the negative aspects of globalization in light of a Christian ethic: loving God and neighbor,
respecting creation and promoting human dignity and wholeness over and against marketplace profit margins.” (Withrow) The prosperity message fails to address one major aspect: the human condition. Prosperity, in terms of increasing income, doesn’t improve in this area, rather it makes things worse. “What makes this gospel particularly dangerous is its propensity to claim innocence of any motive other than fulfilling God’s will for human beings” (Withrow) as it aligns God’s blessings with material gain. The poor are then considered “lazy, ineffectual or misdirected, and therefore, unblessed” (Withrow).
As the gap between the rich and the poor widens due to the victory of capitalism in the world, “the church is called to redefine success in light of the Gospel message that commands love of God and love of neighbor as one would love self” (Withrow). To face this challenge, professor Withrow presents the model of John Wesley’s social ethics. Even during his time, the belief that poverty was a self-incurred fate was prevalent. His work was one that affected change in the social consciousness of the middle and upper classes, not in the social structures. The ultimate biblical commandment of love offered opportunity for compassion. “His distinctive view of gaining, saving, and sharing wealth challenged his constituents to give all that they could in an era of newly evolving capitalism.” (Withrow) Wesley’s prophetic voice of social ethics can find meaning in today’s church and help transform the consumer culture from within by redefining the economic success models that result in “advocacy for the marginalized and invisible persons, promoting effective development of sustainable communities” (Withrow).
The message of the church needs to change from one that enslaves and degrades others to one that puts a human face back on the category of “the poor.” This proposed ethic is what is called “responsible grace.” This ethic, founded in God’s love, is capable of transforming the lives of those that experience it. “Wesley did not challenge the political system of Britain at the time… but approached change through theological understanding.” (Withrow) In redefining success, the church must accept the challenge of promoting biblical freedom against the imperialistic piety promoted by the prosperity theologians. This means breaking out of the inward focus of what God can do for me, to become a “transformative community… addressing people in poverty and groaning environment” (Withrow). It is not only a matter of caring for peoples’ souls, but also by showing radical love, having a preference for the poor, understanding the conditions that cause poverty, and being the voice of the voiceless through critical discourse. This way the church becomes the community of believers Christ has called us to be.
Prosperity theology is founded on the materialistic and individualistic approach to life that benefits those who preach it, while distorting the biblical message of love to others. The lies it teaches presents a worldview that alienates its followers from the real life issues present in today’s world, thus denying real change and transformation. “Hatched in the incubator of the ‘American Dream’” (Smith) and promoted by the followers of the New Thought, it suffers from severe deficiencies in their ideas of how God and humanity relate to one another, while belittling Jesus’s sacrifice and message of his gospel.
With ours being such a materialistic society, this theology will prevail as long as there are promoters and listeners. Sadly, when followers find out that “not all that shines is gold,” their deception can turn them away from the faith that initially brought them to God. It is our job as the church to continue presenting the unaltered message of the gospel and be a community that make “sacred space for the poor to gain voice and opportunity for holistic living” (Withrow) while being agents of God’s radical love: a love that transforms.
10 of 11
I. Reyes|Theology
Works Cited
Bucer-Beza, Knox and John Calvin. "The Real Prosperity Gospel" God's ways may be hidden, but his purpose for us is not." Christianity Today 53.4 (2009): 58.
Hladky, Kathleen. "I Double-Dog Dare you in Jesus' Name! Claiming Christian Wealth and the American Prosperity Gospel." Religion Compass 6.1 (2012): 82-96.
Jenkins, Phillip. "Notes from the Global Church: The Case for Prosperity." Christian Century 127.24 (2010): 45.
Lausanne Theology Working Group, Africa Chapter. "Lausanne Theology Working Group
Statement on the Prosperity Gospel: From the Africa Chapter of the Lausanne Theology Working Group as its consultation in Akripong, Ghana, 8-9 October, 2008 and 1-4 September 2009." Evangelical Review of Theology 34 (2010): 99-102.
McConnell, D.R. A Different Gospel: Biblical and Historical Insights into the Word of Faith Movement. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1995.
Salinas, Daniel. "Emilio Antonio Núñez Castañeda." Latin American Theology 4.2 (2009): 2044.
Smith, David L. A Handbook of Contemporary Theology: Tracing Trends and Discerning Directions in Today's Theological Landscape. Grand Rapids: Baker Academy, 1992. Kindle Book.
Withrow, Lisa R. "Success and the Prosperity Gospel: From Commodification to Transformation A Wesleyan Perspective." Journal of Religious Leadership 6.2 (2007): 15-41.