Skip to main content

What is the Prosperity Gospel and Why is it So Popular?


The prosperity gospel is widely practised throughout the world, and hugely popular in Africa. It has also gained a foothold in Europe via certain modern movements that emphasise the 'health' aspect of 'health and wealth' teaching i.e. the idea that God doesn't want anyone to suffer, but for all to be healed. We are probably all familiar with TV evangelists who ask us to give, and God will reward us by giving back. The proof that it works is the large house they themselves live in, and the executive car they drive.

The trouble with this teaching is that it does not line up with the overall message of Scripture. The so-called proof texts used by prosperity teachers are often taken from the Old Testament (nothing in and of itself bad about that), turning descriptive teaching (a description of what God did then) into prescriptive ideas (God wants that to happen to everybody). "God made Abraham prosperous. He wants to make us prosperous too!"

Now, there are a lot of blogs and videos out there about prosperity teaching, so I don't want to repeat what is written and said there. Instead I have a question. Where did this teaching come from? When did it originate, and why? The answer is that it began in the early 20th century in the States, when an over-optimistic view of modern history ("things can only get better") combined with Christianity to create a mix that resulted in the prosperity gospel. This teaching spread throughout the world via mission work.

What a lot of missiologists miss, it seems to me, is that there is often something in the host culture (the culture of those in e.g. Africa) that makes this teaching very popular. Two possibilities:

  1. Poverty is a massive issue in the majority world, so prosperity teaching appeals to those wanting to climb out of the poverty trap
  2. Traditional African religion includes an emphasis on the role of ancestral spirits in a family's everyday life, which includes fertility (more children are needed to work in the fields), good harvests (if you have more crops come in then  you need to eat, you have a surplus you can sell), and protection from evil. All three of these are, or can be, included in prosperity teaching
Probably both are to some extent true. The problem with (2) is that people are likely to turn to God on a Sunday, and the ancestors Monday - Saturday. Or turn to God, and if their prayers are not answered, turn to the ancestors for help.

One of the worst results of prosperity teaching is a complete lack of a theology of suffering. I don't see how 2 Cor can make any sense if suffering is not part of God's plan for us. In 2 Cor Paul teaches that suffering and victory are inextricably linked.

This does not mean that we have to preach about suffering every Sunday. Instead, let's focus on the 'now and not yet' of the kingdom. Now we may need to suffer, but when God's kingdom is fully realised (at the second coming of our Lord Jesus the Messiah), we will never have to suffer again. Alleluia!

Image by bertin23 from Pixabay

More info here from the Lausanne movement.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Flow Chart for Bible Translation (a Relevance Theory Approach)

One of the current theories behind modern translation work is Relevance Theory. [1] Here is a flow chart that explains the process often used to produce a draft when using such an approach: *Make sure your translation committee makes the decision as to what kind of translation they want. A domesticated translation is one that submits to dominant values in the target language [2] whereas a foreignized translation is one that is happy to import foreign terms and ideas from Hebrew, Greek, or the language of wider communication such as the Greek term baptizo . The chart looks something like this: Text                                   Communicated Ideas                  Context A sower went out to sow  A farmer went out to sow grain   People scattered/threw seed etc. The text has very little information, but behind i...
Post a Comment
Read more

Asset Based Bible Translation (ABBT)

Many of you will have heard of asset-based community development (ABCD). How can Bible translation programmes be asset based, rather than deficit based? The best way to look at this is a comparison table: Deficit based Asset based Driven by outsiders Driven by the community Outside funding Community funded Done to meet a need Done to help the community grow Quality control done by a consultant Community checked and approved Control from outside-in Lead by stepping back Products not accepted? Products are accepted Little engagement Engagement with products Scientific Organic Not sustainable Sustainable Of course many translation programmes these days are neither one nor t'other, they are somewhere between these two extremes. Nevertheless, this illustrates a point, and shows that the current ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Integral Mission vs. Holistic Mission - What's the Difference?

 A lot of people are talking about integral mission these days, whereas the idea of holistic mission seems to have fallen by the wayside. What's the difference? Holistic mission is mission to the whole person, taking into account their physical as well as spiritual needs. Evangelism is combined with social action. Unfortunately, this term has been used for some years now, and much mission that was labelled 'holistic' was mainly social action. Integral mission has more focus on communities and their felt needs. What issues of poverty and (lack of) justice are there? How can a given community begin to address these issues? What input do they need from outsiders as they do so? How can they define kingdom goals that will bring them out of their physical and spiritual poverty? Lausanne defines it here . The fact is that the neediest communities are often ones that lack the Bible, and lack a clear orthography (alphabet corresponding to the phonemic system of the language, and tha...
Post a Comment
Read more