Jonathan Shuttlesworth, in his book and YouTube blog 35 Questions for Those Who Hate the Prosperity Gospel, in defense of the prosperity gospel, claims:
“The people who hate the prosperity of the Church really hate the Church itself and wish the Church didn’t exist. They know the Church holds back the global anti-Christ system, which is prophesied in Revelation. They know the Church can’t function without money.”
This statement targets notable critics such as John MacArthur and John Piper, suggesting their opposition to the prosperity gospel stems from animosity toward the Church. However, Shuttlesworth’s assertion fails to account for the nuanced critiques offered by charismatic theologians like Dr. Michael Brown, who also challenge prosperity theology while passionately supporting the Church. This teaching blog will examine Shuttlesworth’s claim in light of biblical principles and classical Pentecostal theology.
The Church’s Role in God’s Plan
Shuttlesworth is correct in affirming the Church’s central role in God’s redemptive work and its opposition to the forces of the anti-Christ. Scripture proclaims the Church as the "pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15) and a restraining force against evil (2 Thess. 2:6-7). However, his implication that criticism of the prosperity gospel equates to hating the Church oversimplifies the issue.
Critiques of the prosperity gospel are often aimed at preserving the integrity of the Church, not undermining it. Dr. Michael Brown, a charismatic theologian and Pentecostal leader, has raised significant concerns about the prosperity gospel while defending the vibrancy and mission of the global Church. He argues that teachings overemphasizing wealth risk distorting the gospel and misrepresenting the heart of Christ’s message.
Does the Church Need Money to Function?
Shuttlesworth’s assertion that the Church “can’t function without money” highlights a practical truth: financial resources are necessary for ministry. The early Church relied on the generosity of believers (Acts 2:44-45), and Paul encouraged giving to support ministry efforts (2 Cor. 9:7). However, it is crucial to recognize that money is a tool, not the foundation of the Church’s mission.
Jesus Himself modelled a ministry that prioritized dependence on God over material wealth. He sent His disciples out with minimal provisions, trusting God to meet their needs through the hospitality of others (Luke 10:4-7). The Church’s power and effectiveness come from the Holy Spirit, not financial abundance.
Critiques from Within: A Call for Reform
Shuttlesworth directs his comments toward prominent non-charismatic leaders like John MacArthur and John Piper, but his argument neglects the critiques from within the charismatic community. Dr. Michael Brown, among others, affirms the Church’s need for resources while calling for a biblically balanced approach to prosperity teachings. Brown warns that when material wealth becomes a central focus, it risks overshadowing the gospel’s core message of salvation, sanctification, and service.
This internal critique demonstrates that opposition to the prosperity gospel is not inherently antagonistic toward the Church. On the contrary, it often reflects a deep love for the Church and a desire to see it remain faithful to Christ’s teachings.
The Church and the Anti-Christ System
Shuttlesworth connects prosperity critics to the prophesied anti-Christ system described in Revelation. While it is true that the Church opposes the forces of the anti-Christ, linking critiques of the prosperity gospel to hatred of the Church risks conflating theological disagreement with spiritual rebellion.
Revelation portrays the Church as victorious, overcoming the anti-Christ through the blood of the Lamb and the word of its testimony (Rev. 12:11). This triumph is not contingent on material wealth but on faithfulness to Christ. By equating opposition to prosperity teachings with enmity toward the Church, Shuttlesworth oversimplifies the complexities of theological dialogue.
A Balanced Perspective
It is undeniable that the Church requires resources to fulfill its mission. However, these resources must be stewarded with integrity, humility, and a focus on advancing God’s kingdom. Classical Pentecostal theology affirms God as the provider of every need, yet it cautions against equating financial prosperity with spiritual success.
Critiques of the prosperity gospel are not necessarily rooted in hatred for the Church but often stem from a desire to safeguard its mission and testimony. As Dr. Michael Brown has observed, a gospel that prioritizes wealth risks losing sight of the transformative power of Christ’s cross.
Conclusion: Loving the Church Through Honest Critique
Shuttlesworth’s claim that prosperity gospel critics hate the Church fails to consider the motivations of many critics, particularly those within the charismatic tradition. Far from wishing the Church didn’t exist, these critiques aim to refine the Church’s focus on Christ and its mission in the world.
The Church stands as a beacon of light in a dark world, empowered by the Holy Spirit and upheld by God’s promises. Its mission transcends financial resources, relying on faith, obedience, and the grace of God. Let us engage in honest dialogue about prosperity theology, always seeking to glorify Christ and strengthen His Church.
Author: Evg. Bradley Sliedrecht BCL, M.Div. ✝️📖✨
(PhD Student)
Comments