I have absolutely no problem with the authorities investigating any business for breaching any laws.

And if this article simply pointed to the double standards of those who have been shown to have double standards, and reported on the actions against them, I'd have no problem with that either.

But the random attribution of "guilt by association" is pretty cheap, don't you think? Simply reeling off a list of high-profile US hucksters and encouraging the inference that our locals must be just as bad, is dishonest as well as tasteless.

Smear campaigns come in all shapes and sizes, and this is pretty small beer, But in my view, to plaster a group of people - whatever you may think of them personally - with inch-thick innuendo but without any evidence, is the act of a cowardly sleaze.

Pericles, the only Australian 'guilt by association' section I saw was where the lack of funding transparency in Australian organisations such as Catch the Fire was highlighted.

Surely making their finances more transparent would resolve this issue, so I don't really take issue with the article. I see it more as a highlight of what can happen if we don't apply the same scrutiny to religious organisations that we do to businesses.

What Is being described here is all within the great American tradition of hucksterism showbiz as made famous by PT Barnum.
Based on the time proven principle that there are far more than one hundred suckers born every minute.
It is also indicative of the inherently phoney, and hypocritical, double-mindedness that is at the base of the sex paranoid puritannical, emotional-sexual "mind" that creates such "religious" hucksterism and which exploits the same "mind" in its target of would be willing suckers.

Leave your discriminative intelligence at the door.

The situation described is fully predictable, and indeed is well known. Scarcely a month goes by without another expose of the shenanigans of some hot gospel preacher or other.

It is a constant source of amazement to me that anyone can believe the nonsensical rubbish espoused by the various churches, and a source of even greater amazement that anyone actually contributes money to these egregious examples of the very worst of bible-bashing con men. Thankfully, Howard is gone, and maybe some sanity might now prevail, although don't hold your breath. Rudd could well turn out to be another one of them.

The imported U.S.A. reilgion of Assembly of God loonies are going even further bringing their loony tune evangelical religion to parliaments. God help us if we are ever ruled by these fundamentalist fruitcakes.

Funny that I know a number of people from the Church of Christ who are supporters of some of the 'culprits' listed. Is Alan in line with the rest of the Church of Christ or is he bitter because most don't agree with him on many things. Could it be that his own brand of liberalism has been deserted by the masses and that those with biblical beliefs being prepared to put their money where their mouth is instead of relying on Government grants. Liberal theology leads to feminist and homosexuals hijacking the agenda. Where Christ is preached people happily part with their hard earned bucks.

"Where Christ is preached people happily part with their hard earned bucks".
Pray what is this money used for, and do the people parting with their hard earned Bucks (Americanism!) know

Kipp

The hard earned bucks should be used for furthering the gospel message and helping the poor. If you have a problem with that argue with God and not me. Funny how we never scrutinzse the earth worshippers in their luxurious lifestyles. I am sure Mr Gore and his UN buddies catch buses everywhere they go! Some of Mr Matheson's ACTU mates are not all that moderate either in their lifestyles. My main point is that if people want to give all they have to a cause they believe fully in what is that to you or me. If people want to give the ACTU all they have what is that to you or me or to the climate change scaremongers.

The Assembly of God preach division politics which is why I was so happy to see their party Family First fail to win a seat in the recent election. The progressive Greens on the other hand are quite likely to pick up the balance of power in the Senate, a good result all round in my opinion.

"The hard earned bucks should be used for furthering the gospel message and helping the poor."

Hmm... I guess with a bit of creative embroidery you could claim that the $10 million corporate jet falls under the "furthering the gospel" bit.

And buying five of them must make Copeland be able to spread five times as much gospel righr?
I suppose you can probably chalk that $107,000 silver mercedes into that category as well.

As for the marble topped toilet... that one's a toughie. Erm... Hmm... Uh... I'll have to get back to you on that one.

As for accountability, pfft. Why, those people asking questions about these multimillionaire christians must just be dirty liberals, even if they're a minister. After all, they're conservative and are cool with jesus, so they must be good people.

When I was young, people criticised church for being boring. Now the church is criticised for being too interesting.

There’s preaching that people want to hear, and it costs money to build auditoriums or hire stadia to have a gathering. There’s music that people want to listen to in their homes, and they’ll pay money to have the CDs produced.

Let’s compare the pentecostals in Australia with something like the Australian Football League, which is also supposedly community based, existing for, and supported by, ordinary people. Both are popular, with pentecostals perhaps putting more bums on seats on any given weekend. The AFL spins enormous amounts of money, but don’t get near the same criticism from the likes of Alan Matheson. Ordinary common sense recognises it takes money to make the wheels turn.

As Gary Ablett noted to the press recently, “Tall poppy syndrome is alive and well here in Australia.”

For people inflicted by tall poppy syndrome, here’s a choice phrase, “Now under investigation”. I’ll explain how they use it. I am jealous of Alan Matheson. I insist to the fraud squad that they should investigate him. They say, ‘why should we bother?’ I say, ‘because he’s a crook’. If I say it often enough, they’ll say, just to get me of their back, ‘Okay, we’ll look into it’. Now I can say to everyone, ‘Alan Matheson is now under investigation by the fraud squad.

Although many believe that Gary Ablett the wearer of Number 5 was God the Geelong Football Club doesn't enjoy tax free status like other religious institutions do.

Footy is entertainment and I dont have to take my hat off!

For moine, Benny Hinz(?) makes for entertaining viewing @ 5.30 on a Saturday morning. Riveting stuff that can take you places you never dreamed of. All part of the rich tapestry...

Sorry Kipp, but FOOTBALL is more relevant too many people than God and such things.

There was a young parson named Bings
who thought about God and such things
but whose secret desire
was a * * * in the choir
with a - - - - - -

There are quite a number of decent, caring, religiously inclined people among my friends. But they would not post the rubbish authored by many of the god-botherers here, whose arguments do equate to jelly on springs - bummers if ever there were any.

As an atheist, I fully object to our digital air spectrum being taken up by this tax-free supernatural drivel. If they want to use the airwaves, then go and get a cable channel.

Its fully time this tax-exemption rort was looked into. Unfortunately I fear it never well.

If these preachers are all high and mighty about morality, then what about honesty and transparency, and living restrained lifestyles.

"Where Christ is preached people happily part with their hard earned bucks.
Posted by runner"

You may think so runner, but Jesus was a man of neither property, nor means and he certainly never asked for money. In fact we know what he thought about 'money-changers' in the temple of God, don't we?

Give me Carol Owens version of Christianity any day:

God forgave my sin in Jesus' name,
I've been born again in Jesus' name,
And in Jesus' name I come to you
To share His love as He told me to.

He said, "Freely, freely you have received; Freely, freely give.
Go in my name and because you believe, Others will know that I live."

All power is given in Jesus' name,
In earth and heaven, in Jesus' name;
And in Jesus' name I come to you
To share His power as He told me to.

He said, "Freely, freely you have received; Freely, freely give.
Go in my name and because you believe, Others will know that I live."

Author: Carol Owens

Says it all, really, wouldn't you say?

It doesn't cost a single thing to offer someone the sign of peace, or a hand held out in LOVE and friendship - but there will be plenty to take your money to save you from "The Fire and The Brimstone!"

Jesus died without a shirt on his back - after spending a short life giving love, freely. do you really think it was so people could FATTEN themselves on the back of their self-association?

If you truly 'believe' (to be/to live like) in Jesus - then extend a little love to a stranger today - to someone who looks like they need it - and I guarantee, you'll feel closer to the Lord than giving to these 'money-changers' will ever make you feel!

Why do we judge so. could it be that we are jealous of sucess. These men and women are preaching and teaching biblicial principles of finance. so what is the trouble with results and manifestation of God's Word? It is the Lord that maketh rich and adds no sorrow with it. If i had books on the New York Times best sellers list i would have a car for each day of the week. You would too. We should not judge to quickly that which we don't understand. When you don't know the seed don't judge the harvest. All of these ministries have large outreaches and large budgets. what they live on is a smal fraction of the money handled. Who needs what and why? Well look at the fruit and the results. To reach souls for Jesus it takes dollars put Christ in front of an audience. God doesn't mind wealth HE CREATED IT. Look at the Book He left us with. Wealth is from cover to cover and beyond.

All of these ministries have large outreaches and large budgets. what they live on is a smal fraction of the money handled.

Yeah right. I prefer the nuns and priests who take vows of poverty.

Who needs what and why? Well look at the fruit and the results. To reach souls for Jesus it takes dollars put Christ in front of an audience.

Jesus lead by example not by the door-charge.

God doesn't mind wealth HE CREATED IT.

Mmmm - I think you'll find it a man's invention - god created the land on which ALL walk - not just a few.

Jesus celarly tells men of faith that god will provide - as he does for the birds in the trees and the flowers in the fields. I am not saying people shouldn't make money - but eh if you really beleive greed is the religion pmark, then Chrisitianity is not really the one.
The reason rich people will rarely discover the kindom of God is because they prefer money to love.

Do your research and look at the lives these televangelists lead - they'renot too removed from those lead by "The Godfather". Funny that, isn't it?

Colinsett,
Do you know what an argument is? If so, could you try putting one.

K£vin,
While I could agree with some of your comments, some of it needs tidying up. For instance, how do these two phrases sit together? –
1) ‘I am not saying people shouldn't make money.’
2) ‘I prefer the nuns and priests who take vows of poverty.’

Did you ever take a vow of poverty?

The shame of it - I almost agree with runner.

Those who choose to give their hard earned to these shysters should be free to do so. Some advertising standards need to be applied to ensure that people know just where their donation is going but then when I get a call from a charity it's not made clear to me what proportion of my support will go to the charity (and from what I've heard I may be lied to if I ask).

Some people may not have paid enough attention to what goes on in the world to pick up on the private jet, mansion thing and think that the people they send money to are giving their all for the work. Should they be warned?

Others will see it as an investment, they give and god gives back (those who think that godliness is a means to gain - see 1 Timothy 6:5).

As I understand it the tax breaks don't apply to the givers.
Scrap the tax and rates exemptions enjoyed by the churches and let them do their thing just as other entertainment organisations do.

R0bert

Well PERICLES.. strange as it sounds I totally agree with all you said :) shock horror!

Key words "evidence". Totally agree on that too.

KEVIN... your first post was remarkable.. beautiful in fact.

The proclamation of the Gospel is indended to also supply the needs of the proclaimer (NOT THE WANTS)... but Pauls example is the best,

1 Corinthians 9 is abundantly clear.

11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?
12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn't we have it all the more?

But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.
13 Don't you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar?
14 In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.

15 But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me. I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast.

IMPORTANT. 'their living' is based on the Lords prayer "Our daily bread" NOT not NOT a classy Mercedes, a marble topped toilet or a Lear jet.

CONCLUSION. "If 'preaching' produces 'profit'...its the wrong kind of preacher and the wrong kind of preaching"

I don't trust any church or religious organisation to do the right thing with the donated money.

Mother Theresa is a good example of how donations were squandered to benefit the Church more than the poor.
She didn't care where the donations came from; would Jesus have taken money from questionable sources like drug dealers?
She chose to not spend this money to improve conditions for the poor; she kept the money in her own bank account and later gave it to the Church.

She left her hospice in Calcutta as poor, primitive and run down as she found it.
When she got sick herself she used a modern California clinic.
Her order always refused to publish any audits.

She opened hundreds of convents all in the name of her own order.

The only 'saints' are the ordinary people in our communities, your average good neighbour, the teacher who goes out of her/his way to help your child, the person who lets you go in front of the supermarket line when you have to deal with a screaming baby and a wonkey-wheeled trolley full of groceries.
These are the people that count- not the leaders of churches who are out to take your money to spend it on luxuries.

I rather see my money go to the ATO; at least we will (generally) all benefit from it.

CELIVIA... I'm glad you raised the issue of Mother Theresa.... I found the report very disturbing.. almost sounded like the 'pimp' who deliberately makes his team of begger children look 'pathetic and horrible' to extract more from passers by....

http://www.infomutt.com/m/mi/missionaries_of_charity.html

JOYCE MEYER ?

Anyone stupid enough to give to this has more money than sense.

http://www.trinityfi.org/press/JoyceMeyer1.html

Joyce Meyer says God has made her rich.

Everything she has came from Him: the $10 million corporate jet, her husband's $107,000 silver-gray Mercedes sedan, her $2 million home and houses worth another $2 million for her four children — all blessings, she says, straight from the hand of God.

It's been an amazing run, nothing short of a miracle, says Meyer, a one-time bookkeeper who heads one of the world's largest television ministries. Her Life in the Word organization expects to take in $95 million this year.

CATCH THE FIRE? As far as I know, Danny Naliah does not draw any funds from the ministry itself, but is supported by private donations towards his support. If they are private they are none of anyone's business but his.

HINN? "There is a sucker born everyday" Word to street..DON'T be a sucker!

MY OWN....background... Our mission holds a multi million dollar chuck of real estate in Singapore... and in various other places in Asia. How did we get it? Simple, when the Dutch were getting out of Indonesia, they had a 'fire sale' of many assets and we picked up a former embassy dirt cheap. Holiday Home in Cameron Highlands Malaysial ? Again.. During the Communist emergency, Wealthy 'capitalists' were getting out, and again.. valuable land at bargain basement prices. The General Director of our 900 member mission... is paid the same as the ordinary worker. Plus.. he has a modest car available.. (belongs to the mission)

I was most amused by Dan S Merengue and pmark's comments.

Essentially, they can both be summed up with the old 'you're just jellus!' argument.

The problem with this argument, is that you can apply it to any successful person at any given time.

Thus if you're to actually pay any attention to this argument, you must accept that any successful person, anywhere, shouldn't be scrutinised, and they must all be good and proper.

Bollocks.

Sorry you two, but didn't you notice the five private jets and the marble topped dunny?
I honestly can't believe you'd just gloss over the fact these people are being investigated for financial indiscretions and assume it's just jealousy. What are you basing this one? What do you know of their financial practices, especially given their lack of transparency?

How on earth can you actually advocate a course of action that turns a blind eye to improper behaviour. The only conclusion I can draw is that you've decided that because they're christian they must be being unjustly persecuted.

Again, I say, bollocks.

I've got to agree with boaz on this one. It boggles the mind that people really think that five private jets is normal for a preacher.
Despite my occasional frustration with the one-eyed nature of some conservative preacher types, I do have nothing but the utmost respect for genuine men of the cloth, be they liberal or conservative in attitude, if they're actually putting the welfare of others at the forefront of their concerns.

But by no stretch of the imagination can that include people who need to buy private jets.

Let's take the idea of the preacher out of the discussion. He is now a movie star, a ball player, a race car driver, a wine seller. Are five jets too many and all the other things that have been brought to light. When was it said the preacher is to be poor. I'm a preacher and I work two jobs to support my family. I'm not doing that good of a job at it either. But I love my church and I love the people God has brought to us. Yet the money is not there. But it is abundantly clear in the Bible - which by the way is not well sited by most in this little blog site that it is God that gives the power to get wealth... not just get by but the power to get wealth. I dare you to find that passage and the merid of others like it and be bothered that a preacher makes a few million a year. And no I don't know the personal finances of these people but it looks like we all will find out. Funny noboby is going after me or... you for that matter. I'm not sure what a preacher needs with five jets my two 19 and 18 year old cars are not yet paid for but for those that fly from state to state and country to country I can see why they might need that type of ability. by the way i am not putting my p.o. box in this for donations. money is a tool people. the Gospel is free yet the medium to preach it is not.

The A.O.G in particular spends their money on more branches [churches] and the money goes to the poor after it pays to maintain the lifestyle of the "pastors" to a standard they have become comfortable with. These parasites fill their own pockets first and charge parishioners a % of their income to belong. They sell what every other church sells hope and fear and act like policemen themselves, that is do what I say, not what I do. This con has been going for thousands of years.It's the best business in the world.

Looks like with politics, it should be a case of Socrates' term 'Out with the Gods and in with the Good'?

It is also interesting that Socrates also talked about finding the 'True Good' through philosophical depth of thought.

Maybe Socrates has been proven correct when proven that philosophers like Thomas Aquinas and John Locke have been able to change history peacefully as Aquinas did when he accepted Socratic Reasoning to balance Christian faith and as Locke did when he virtually organised the 1688 Glorious Revolution which lowered the status of the Christian
Church in British politics forever.

On the other hand we have had the most imhuman of our wars caused by religion or against religion.

Even the 6,000,000 Jews who died in Hitler's death camps was brought on by one religion believing it was superior to the other.

Sadly we are seeing religous problems now, and if Iran is attacked through the theories of Cheney and Bush - and with the Iranians having virtually defeated America twice previously, the second when an American-backed Iran was defeated in the 1980s, one wonders how many Iranians will give their lives, if they eventually are defeated?.

All so much through religion rather than Wisdom and Understanding.


Cheers - BB, WA.

From Bushbred.

In previous Post, please replace Iran with Iraq where obvious misprint is noted.

Regards - BB.

I wouldn't worry about your 'misprints' too much Bushbred, George & Co *preach for profit* just as ?well? as as the miscreants subject of Alan Matheson's article.

Today Iraq, tomorrow Iran - and with a sense of deja vu, it will probably turn out to be a 'just war' against Weapons of Mass Destruction - all in the name of God, 'truth, justice and the American way'.

Methinks dubya is spittin chips tho', his 16 intelligence agencies have outed and said it is all a furphy, since 2003 no less!

TLTR,
You accuse me of thinking they must be innocent because they’re Christian.

No. I am saying that we shouldn’t presume that they are guilty because they are Christian, or because they’re rich, or successful, or famous, or on the telly, or have strange tastes in bathroom décor. That is TPS.

Neither am I against transparency and accountability. These are important.

But I am a little wary that Matheson might have mounted his high horse for theological reasons as much as for financial propriety. He seems to want to tar the Australian church with an American brush. Unlike the C of E or the RC, the Pentecostals in Australia are truly indigenous, as they have no organised or administrative links with overseas churches.

Let these guys on the box be judged by the Rule of Law (or even the Word of God) but not by small mindedness.

It’s the small mindedness of some that says Cliff Richard, despite selling millions of records worldwide, should turn up to his concerts in a beat up Volkswagen (or possibly break down before getting there), rather than in his Rolls, just because he calls himself a Christian. Or the people who think that there is something unscrupulous or dishonorable going on when the Queensland Gospel band, Newsboys, turn up on the BRW list of richest Aussie entertainers when their CDs are top of the US gospel charts.

The majority of Australians are non-religious though we tend to believe that to live our lives according to the 10 commandments is the correct way to go. It is churches who all "preach for their own profit" who turn most of us away from religion. It is a fact that it is very difficult to realize while within a church, however when one extracts oneself and can look from the outside in it is abundentley clear. Re the book "Jesus the Man" the churches practice mass mind control of the vunerable to preach for their own profit.

Ho Hum is right about P.T. Barnum.
The entertaining con man is as much a part of the American character as the puritan, the entrepreneur or the hedonist.

Some TV evangelists seem to roll all of these elements into one.
Precisely what makes them interesting.

Madonna is paid millions for being conflicted and "interesting".
Why not Tammy Faye Bakker?
(If anybody knocks Tammy, I'll punch 'em.
And I've never even *seen* her show!
Tammy's probably the only person who has ever made me feel "Sympathy for the UnDevil").

If Coca Cola can make billions selling flavoured sugar water, then why not Tammy Faye Bakker?
"Mega-Bucks for Jesus" is no more objectionable than "Mega-Bucks for Flavoured Sugar Water".

All I object to is the tax exemption.

This is what encourages fraudsters and cults.
Remove the exemption and you'd still get a few, but at least they'd pay some back to the communities they take from.
Just like Coca Cola and Madonna do.
Many schools and hospitals have been built on the proceeds of candy water and cone bras.

TurnRightThenLeft: "How on earth can you actually advocate a course of action that turns a blind eye to improper behaviour?"

Improper?
Ever heard of 'innocent until proven guilty'?

I say turn a blind eye to everybody's finances (companies, churches, political parties), just *tax* them all the same!

Shonga, don't get too upset:
"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun", Ecclesiastes 1:9.
Especially on Sunday morning TV.
But who's watching?

There are good Biblical reasons for minimizing any sign or trappings of 'richness'.. because it simply goes against the whole thrust of the Gospel.. and the whole New Testament.

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God" (Mat 19:24)

Luke 10:3

Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. 4Do not take a purse or bag or sandals; and do not greet anyone on the road.

5"When you enter a house, first say, 'Peace to this house.' 6If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; if not, it will return to you. 7Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages."

"Give us this day, our daily bread"....er... not our camel train or corporate Jet!

ON THE DAY that someone says "God made me rich" you will know that falsehood is speaking.

BUT... if a person becomes wealthy due to business expertise and entrepreneurship... and then passes on as much as they can.. and doesn't make a song and dance about it..

Matt 6:2

"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 3But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

...it will show in their life and God will be truly glorified.

Boaz. I agree with much you say about charity and I’m pleasantly surprised at your criticism of Mother Theresa :)
I blame the Vatican also.

People who make donations to these greedy organisations do not have as pure an intention as the people who donate to genuine charities, such as the Salvation Army, that are actually out to help the needy. (I exclude the people who’ve been mislead into believing that these organisations are proper charities).

Benny Hinn (and other prosperity preachers) encourages people who cannot afford a big donation to make credit card donations and falsely promises that they’ll be rewarded by receiving (from God?) a multiple of their donation and even inclines that the more you donate, the more chance there is that your wish (e.g. of being cured from disease) comes true.

This is encouraging people to donate for the wrong reason: people should not give with the intention of receiving something better in return.
True giving is done with the intention of helping someone in need, not to ultimately benefit yourself.
IMHO, the ability of helping someone in need feels as a gift in itself.
Whoever has the right intention to help the poor or the needy would NOT want to see their donation go towards financing some false cult leader’s wealthy lifestyle.

Even though I do not believe in a god, I can imagine from a Christian’s perspective that it’s sad that prosperity gospel/cult leaders succeed in making people believe that Jesus will help them after they donate.
Should these prosperity organisations including Hillsong and Church of Scientology qualify for tax exemptions? Do they genuinely classify as non-profit or benevolent organisations?

BTW what people do with their money AFTER THEY PAY TAX is their business. Madonna. or other celebrities mentioned. pay their taxes. What I am concerned about is pastors or cult leaders who ‘donate’ their salary back to the ‘church’ (this happens at Hillsong) so on paper they have no income. Still, they are able to live a life of luxury. They should be scrutinised as much as any other organisation! And taxed, too.

DB,
You can quote all the misleading biblical phrases that you like religion has an answer for everything. The sad fact is that there is not a shred of tangible evidence to prove religion one way or the other. It remains the best and biggest business in the world, especially good for vulnerable people who need a crutch to get though life. Of course these people are the easiest to exploit.

i still do not see the logic behind the statements made towards the prosperity of these men and women of God. wealth and riches are in the house of the righteous...it is the lord that giveth thee the power to get wealth that he may establish his covenant...give and it shall be given...so shall your barns be filled and your presses burst forth with wine...prove me saith the lord if i... find these verses put the context to them and tell me god wants his people broke and poor. a poor person won't be heard even if they have the key to protect the city. it is unbiblical to stay poor as a christian. jesus came and preached the gospel to the poor. what would be good news to a poor person? folks poverty and sickness are curses. they are things to be pious about. jesus shed his blood on the cross so we could be free from the penalty of sin. lack and poverty are not the idea God has for his people. God does and always has made his people rich (at least it is there for us). God saves us now and will help us everyday in everything wealth just happens to be one of those things. let's not forget reaching out to the lost and healing the sick and preaching the good news of the kingdom of God. these ministries have scripture and a covenant keeping God on their side. i would say touch not mine anointed nor do my holy prophets any harm.

pmark see 1 Timothy 6:5

R0bert

pmark, I am not against pastors or religious leaders earning high incomes I just want them to pay their taxes just like any other taxable entity.

i just had one of my servants bring me a copy of I timothy 6:5 being that he was late i scourged him real good. seriously though that is a great scripture as all are. i am correct in thinking the part "supposing that gain is godliness" is the part for the topic and the first is not directed at me. but again gain could not be a substitute for godliness or a litmus test for being in the faith. rather a act of obedience towards the realm of God proving His Word in all facets of life. Salvation, healing, prosperity, righteousness... the list can go on and on of the things that can be had through the exercising of God's Word. The Word works when you work it by faith.
if the facts are that the ministers are breaking laws then they should lawyer up like anyone else would do and revisions of the laws should be made. but there are a lot of bunny trails being created by this topic mainly this idea that ministers should not be rich. i just don't see it in the Bible. if you sow you are going to grow. God just can't reverse His Word when ever it is convenient to someones ideas.

pmark - you say that religious figures have just as much right to be rich as anyone else.

Okay...

I'd argue however, that if they're genuine examples of christian generosity, they wouldn't need these mere material possessions - in fact, if they are indeed worthy of praise, they'd be selling items of ridiculous luxury like marble topped toilets.

I'm not saying they should be living in hovels, far from it. Of course they should live comfortably, heck, even a reasonably wealthy lifestyle.

But if you're trying to tell me I should admire these peopel for being leading religious figures, but their priority is to have a marble topped toilet over using that money to help others, I can't help but feel that their morality is nothing to admire.
I can quite honestly say that if I possessed those kinds of resources I'd not be wasting it on private jets or marble toilets - and yet, these people are supposed to be people we admire for their religious guidance.

Well screw that. I'd sooner listen to the generous pauper than the syndicated preacher with a hundred dollar haircut. I'm pretty sure Jesus had some pretty scathing comments for those who talked the talk but didn't walk the walk.

The focus of the article is that these multimillionaires aren't subject to the same scrutiny as standard multimillionaires because they funnel their money through religious organisations.

It seems to me, that allowing this to happen is allowing a loophole that detracts from the reasons why we let religious organisations go without paying tax - the idea being, of course, is that their primary goal is to help the less fortunate, not amass great wealth.
Something these people seem to have forgotten.

pmark, you wrote "to reach souls for Jesus it takes dollars put Christ in front of an audience.". Your statement is completely contradicted by the life of Jesus himself. He lived in poverty and had nowhere to lay his head. To the poor widow who put in all she had into the offering He said she has put in more than all the others. He constantly warned against riches and greed "which is idolatry".

I would direct readers to a great book on this issue called 'Eye of the Needle' by Jim Reiher. Click on the link below for details:

http://www.unoh.org/html/s02_article/article_view.asp?id=248&nav_cat_id=-1&nav_top_id=-1&dsb=677

Timothy this Luke that it's all spin. Religion is a facade perpertrated upon the life of Jesus as a way for mortals to make money from frightening people with the devil and making them pay to go to heaven by contributions to the gentry of the church. It is as much a con as anything Peter Foster has done.

These televangelists with their own areoplanes and exclusive mansions should get to know thier own book better:

"You cannot serve God and wealth". Matthew 6.24

And here's one for Bush, Blair and Howard:

"Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?" Matthew 7.22

"Then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; go away from me you evil-doers." Matthew 7.23

Pmark,
You are coming on too strong to suggest that it is unbiblical to stay poor as a Christian. Logically, this is equivalent of saying that people are sinning if they are poor.

You ask, what would be good news to a poor person? Well, telling them that there is a path to riches in God’s name may well be leading them on a path to temptation or frustration. In the Bible, there were good people who were both rich and poor. The one man, Job, had seasons of great wealth and great poverty, and these had nothing to do with his faithfulness towards God.

I’ve met peasant farmers in Africa and I’d never suggest to them that the Gospel is a means to radically changing their financial situation. There are too many other factors involved. While the Bible does encourage us to sew good things in our lives, the prosperity that the Bible talks about is more in the inner qualities, such as peace, joy, and other gifts of the Spirit.

Nils,
I don’t know who you are, but I do know Jim Reiher, and I was thinking of recommending the same book myself. It’s a great read on this subject. And no, Jim doesn’t own a private jet or even a flashy car.

The most important issue to address is the one of sin/poor. Please do not follow up my point with your thought and make them out to be the same thing. I am a minister of the Gospel and have been for over 15 years. I also am bi-vocational meaning I work for profit outside the church. Both together have not added up to a pay check to even give my family a vacation or cars less than 18 years old. Yes 18 years old. The idea of the poor equating to sinfulness is pure stupidity. This is not what I advocate. Poverty is a holdover curse of the Old Testament. Jesus has come to redeem us from the curse of the law becoming a curse for us.
Within the Word of God you must differentiate between the saved and the sinner. God's promise to the willing and obedient is that they will eat the best the earth has to offer. To guard from anything that takes us away from a close relationship with God through Christ Jesus is wrong. Be it gold or silver, cars and mansions. Yet I am still to find a rich person (saved) half as obsessed with money than the poor and broke saved) people that serve it 60 and 70 hours a week just to get by and start the week over again to do the same thing.
The idea that the message is free and the medium is not... well to that I say nobody gave me the church building and the property just because I am preaching Jesus each week. The bills keep coming.
And yes I went to the website with the book. I just can't afford the 20 bucks and the tee shirts cost to much as well and for that matter Jesus didn't take credit cards. The only position named in His ministry team was the treasurer. And yet not one time did Jesus give money away. what did He need a treasurer for?

Every one is right in their owns eyes it is the Lord that weighs the heart. No place to lay his head is more a statement of ideals and mission than it is His socioeconomic condition. Jesus even called men to be his disciples that had some formidable economic status. Jesus himself must have had some means about Him to be able to speak in the Temple as His custom was. Poor, meandering homeless people would never been allowed to take part in the Temple rites. I serve God by faith not because of what he gives me but because He has saved me and filled me with His Spirit. Worldly standards of wealth have alluded me for now yet I'll keep severing God nevertheless because He daily loads me with benefits and my cup runneth over!
Job by the way did serve God mainly because of what God did for him. Satan even picked up on that. That was the whole means of attack against Job. God didn't give Job a little joy or a little peace at the latter end. He (God) gave Job twice as much as before. That would be money and family, gold and silver even cattle or we would simply say God made him rich. I probably didn't make any friends with that statement but I'll risk it all with this one. I heard a long time ago that the only thing the devil hates worse than a saved person is a rich saved person. Listen folks I've been at this long enough to know that it is about salvation not what car I drive or how many homes a person can have. Money no doubt matters because it is the most frequently sited topics in the Bible. Yet the main major topic of all is that you must be born again. Call on Jesus today and let Him cleanse you from all sin and unrighteousness. he is ready and waiting today.

pmark,
We are Australians here we don't receive "pay cheques" you are perhaps in the wrong country. Go back to yankeeland where the evengelical nutters come from.

"Money no doubt matters because it is the most frequently sited topics in the Bible. Yet the main major topic of all is that you must be born again. Call on Jesus today and let Him cleanse you from all sin and unrighteousness. he is ready and waiting today.
Posted by pmark,"

And all you need is to give a little love - you don't need to ask for a fistful of dollars too. Jesus said follow him (do as he did) not worship him.

pmark is merely another vulture scavenger parisite who preys on the weaknesses of others for his own financial gain it is criminal.

Pmark,
I’d agree that $20 is a lot for a book. But I don’t know why you protest. Weren’t you the one who said that the medium of the message doesn’t come free? How much were you happy to pay for your Bible dictionary, or your study Bible?

You said a few times that God doesn’t want his people to be poor. In that line, I can’t see why you keep reminding us of the state of your car or other financial challenges.

You say you don’t serve God because of what he gives you, but you accuse Job of serving God because of what he gave him. Are you more righteous than Job? Satan accused Job of serving God only for what he could get out of it. However, it was a false accusation. Job’s motivation was pure.

Similarly, this article was accusing certain Christians with being in it for the money, or worse, theft. God has infinite riches and he blesses generously. But I hope the Gospel we preach is never complicated in desires for the riches of this world on the part of the messenger or the message.