Televangelist's son defends church and preacher's spending
© 2008 The Associated Press
DALLAS — The son of a Christian televangelist targeted by a Senate committee investigation into possible financial wrongdoing is defending the church and preacher's spending in an interview with a Dallas-Fort Worth television station.
"How can you reach the world if you don't have money to do it?" asked John Copeland, chief executive of Newark, Texas-based Kenneth Copeland Ministries, in an interview with KTVT-TV.
His father, Kenneth Copeland, is among six well-known evangelical ministries under scrutiny over their preachers lifestyles, funded with donors' generosity. The top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, said he wants to know if tax breaks given to churches were being abused.
Televangelist Kenneth Copeland is one of the founders of the modern prosperity gospel movement, which holds that God wants his faithful followers to be rewarded spiritually and financially. Read more here
From Let Us Reason Ministries:
Kenneth Copeland writes, "Do you want a hundredfold return on your money? Give and let God multiply it back to you. He urges his supporters, "Invest heavily in God; the returns are staggering, ... "Every man who invests in the Gospel has a right to expect the staggering return of one hundredfold." (Laws of Prosperity , pg.67) This may be true but it may not be in your bank account.
This sounds like a promotional gimmick for the stock market!
This is why Creflo Dollar and Kenneth Copeland can lead the congregation in an affirmation "Money come unto me NOW" three times. (Dec.4, 1999 Voice of victory telecast).
Creflo Dollar says “Yo’all better obey the prophet and reap the prophets reward, my prophet is rich and I’m gonna be rich too” “I call in the money, I found me a preacher, this is my first million and to it, do you all hear what I’m saying,…I’m going to have what I say, what I say, what I say, what I say, what I say”(and the people cheered madly)...also known as name it and claim it, blab it and grab it...
So John Copeland wants to know how to reach the world if you don't have money to do it? All of the early Christians basically lived in poverty, and they shook the world upside down for Christ.Jesus sent the disciples out without money --Matthew. 10:9-12 “ Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper in your money belts, nor bag for your journey, nor two tunics, nor sandals, nor staffs; for a worker is worthy of his food. Now whatever city or town you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and stay there till you go out.” They did not rent a room but depended on others hospitality and the Lord for their provision. The money belt was a small purse that would carry very little coins, they did not have dollar bills then but coins.
Perhaps John Copeland needs to read the Bible to discover the answer to his question. Kenneth Copeland preaches another gospel which has nothing to do with the cross of Christ and salvation through the blood of Christ only and is leading millions away from the cross of Christ down the wide road.
Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, which leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat. Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matthew 7: 13,14
Word of Faith
Copeland is standing up for what he believes is right, and that is the future of our First Amendment rights. That is the bigger picture here. No ONE Senator should be given the kind of power to access such information as Grassley has requested.
ReplyDeleteHi Michele:
ReplyDeleteThank you for stopping by. Whenever a person applies for a 501c3 IRS tax exempt status for religious purposes, that person opens himself up to government scrutiny, and is subject to the laws of the government that applies to any other non-profit tax exempt corporation, and Copeland, etal is no exception. This is not a first amendment issue, but an IRS tax-exempt status issue with possible abuse of the status. Secondly, Copeland does not preach the gospel of Christ, but another gospel and is not even a church according to New Testament doctrine.
Toni
I think the key word here is "government" scrutiny. I am another who does not believe that it is even under consideration that Grassley should be able to call for this kind of information. If they allow him to do that now, what will be next?
ReplyDeleteThere is still no evidence to date that there has been any wrong doing on Copleand's part - or any of these ministries for that matter. Grassley has requested some VERY specific information concerning others that may have shared Copeland's pulpit over the last few years. Why and what would he want with this information?? I pray Copeland continues to stand strong for all of our sakes.
ReplyDeleteTo dreamweaver and soulshinin:
ReplyDeleteI will try to answer your remarks using the Biblical examples set out for all Christians concerning this situation. Jesus said in Matthew 22:21 to Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.
The response of Jesus when his enemies or the pharisees tried to trap him by asking whether it was right for the Jews, whose nation had been taken over by the Roman Empire, to pay tribute to the Roman emperor. He took a Roman coin that would be used to pay the tribute (taxes) and asked whose picture was on it; his questioners answered, “Caesar’s.” The reply of Jesus implied that in using Roman coins, the Jews accepted the rule of the Romans, and so the Roman government had the right to tax them, as long as the Jews were not compromising their religious duties. Jesus’ more general point was, “Give to worldly authorities the things that belong to them, and to God what belongs to God.”
The second reference cited in the Scriptures is Romans 13, in which the Apostle Paul advocates submission to earthly rulers.
Nowhere in the Bible does it teach us to obey evil rulers. Nowhere. Quite the contrary. In fact, the Bible has inspired more non-violent civil disobedience movements than any other religious document. The example of Jesus and the apostles was to submit to arrest, submit to being jailed, even submit to execution. But, in no way, can one derive from biblical example that we are to do evil or disobey the government officials because we don't like the rules, as is Copeland's situation. He knew the rules going in when he signed onto the IRS tax exempt 501c3 program.
Copeland, falls into both of these examples. As I have pointed out in another response, when a person voluntarily files for a 501c3 tax exempt with the IRS, who is the government, he is accepting the rules that go with the application and becomes a "corporation" even tho it is a religious entity; the person and or "corporation" is subject to the laws of the government. Like it or not, that is the law, and it follows with the biblical principle set forth above by Jesus and Paul. This is not a constitutional issue or a first amendment issue, but an IRS 501c3 tax exempt issue, which is entirely separate from the First amendment.
As far as Copeland is concerned, it is my opinion that he is a shameful example of biblical Christianity and he is merchandising, perverting and exploiting the Gospel message of Christ, and totally and completely disregards the Scriptural teachings at the expense of millions of people, for his own monetary gain.
Toni
Copeland definitely has gotten the criticism from all sides. I am not a believer in his teachings, but I do see the bigger picture here. I realize how the decision made in this case could affect all of our futures. Grassley is walking a FINE line and it's one that hopefully he will be prevented from crossing.
ReplyDeleteHi monday blues:
ReplyDeleteYep, one bad apple does spoil the whole bunch. However, God's Word trumps all and judgement starts within the house of God.
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? 1 Peter 4:17
Blessings to you.
I am still trying to figure out why Grassley did not try going the IRS route first. Why did he jump right in skipping the most logical route? It almost seems as if he wanted to hype to follow.
ReplyDelete