Another Practical Guide to the Logic, Philosophy, and Thoughts of Christianity

Section 1 - Article 9

In summary for this point, the question one must ask themselves if it is 'righteous' to give to God willingly, in hopes to get more back, regardless as cash or other forms of incentive. Can God be bribed?

The next point is the main part of this article, and it is to address the question "Was Jesus rich?" We may at some point in time have heard justifications that Jesus was filthy rich. After all, He had Judas Iscariot as the treasurer (John 12:5-6, 13:29). And surely the seamless coat that Jesus had was expensive, otherwise the Roman soldiers would not have cast lots for it (John 19:23). There are some other very weird examples to justify that Jesus was rich, such as the daily feeding of 13 grown man (Jesus + 12 disciples) and so on. But I found those really weak, and proper reading of the scriptures in context would quite easily prove that those are incorrect.

Firstly, interpreting that having a treasurer means that one is rich is as inaccurate as having a bank account means that there are large amounts of savings in it. Surely it is weak to say that if I had a cupboard with 6 T-Shirts, it meant that there are 6 people living or sharing a cupboard with me, or that the cupboard was used to hold cups and utensils and not books or other materials. I am not certain how Roman soldiers shared prisoners' clothes, but it should be obvious that the sleeve of a tunic is pretty much worthless compared to a whole piece regardless of time. So it does make sense to cast lots for a larger piece of clothing since they have already divided Jesus' garments into four parts.

It is true that many of these verses can go either way in interpretation since there is much we do not know, but let me then point out the poisonous implications of the evil prosperity gospel, for if Jesus was rich, then it is implied that He is a liar, a hypocrite, guilty of schadenfreude, and very selfish.

First, let us establish that a liar, hypocrite, and selfish person cannot possibly be God incarnate, much less atone for the sins of mankind (according to basic Biblical principles). And certainly, if Jesus was a liar, hypocrite, selfish, and not capable of redeeming mankind, there really is not much point of being a Christian. And when one lies about being God Himself, God does not give him or her blessings or divine empowerment for healing or casting out demons. One good example of this is the unbeliever trying to cast out demons in the name of Jesus and Paul (Acts 19:15).

So at the very least, given that Peter was successful in Acts 3:6 in healing the needy, meant that the part in the earlier part of the chapter where Peter was described as poor to be true – where he stated that he said he did not have silver or gold. But surely, according to prosperity gospel, these disciples doing the work of God should be wealthy? Maybe Peter forgot to take his money bag, or he only had brass or copper? If he only had brass or copper, I propose that does not count as rich.

Now, onto Jesus' finances.

If Jesus was rich as many of these prosperity gospel preacher claims, then He was either a selfish man, or someone who simply wants to have power over His disciples, and He wants to exhibit this control by money. Why? Because in Matt 19:21, He told the nice young man that if he wanted to be perfect, he was to sell everything, give it to the poor, and then follow Jesus.

Well, here is where the danger is. If Jesus was rich, He certainly was not setting an example for what He is teaching. He is therefore a hypocrite, for His making a rich man poor in order to follow Him is quite hypocritical, not to mention very unconvincing. And it would also be a form of psychological control where He alone would then be rich, whilst having poor disciples to follow and depend on Him. Is this the Jesus that would be the Christ?

Later, in Matthew 19:23-24, Jesus told His disciples that it is extremely difficult for a rich man to enter into heaven. And to most of us, "a camel going through the eye of a needle" is very much impossible. Some prosperity preachers justified that the "eye of the needle" is a small door that a camel must crouch, thus it is difficult but not impossible. Yet, using Strong's Greek dictionary, the "eye of the needle" means "the eye of an actual needle" since the word used was "sowing", with no link to a door or opening. If it was not impossible, the disciples would not then have asked how would people then be saved, and Jesus responding that only with God is the impossible possible.