The people need to stop giving their tens of millions of dollars each year to all these fat-spirited televangelists.
There must be some preacher who gets on the airwaves or on cable or whatever who isn't simply personally greedy. Who is he or she? Certainly none of the rich ones can claim the position of non-greedy televangelist. Who are the modestly living televangelists not because their ministries don't get donations but because the televangelists don't live like multi-multimillionaires?
The scandals just rock one televangelist outfit after another. It doesn't stop. It's worse than the Roman Catholics and pedophilia in numbers. It's worse than the Episcopalians in numbers of openly homosexual priests, at lease so far. Frankly, the greed of the self-styled conservative-Republican-Christian televangelists is just another form of unchecked lust just as are pedophilia and homosexuality.
All this decadence just gives Christianity such a terrible image to the unconverted and to many of those espousing Christianity. It's deplorable. Where are the standards in these people's minds?
Now the Richard Roberts family of the ostensible Christian university known as Oral Roberts University is embroiled in scandalous charges that if only half true are disqualifying for position as shepherds of a flock of Christians. We truly believe in not spreading rumors and in not jumping to conclusions without both sides, all sides, having aired its position, but if this situation is true to form concerning big-time televangelists, the Roberts family is not going to come out clean. Already, Richard Roberts, the university's president, is taking a defensive position rather than repenting concerning any of the numerous charges. He hasn't started out by denying the charges. Rather, he has started out by attempting to diminish or play down the importance and significance of the wrong-doing.
We don't know how it all is unfolding. We don't know how it was begun internally. We don't know whether the Gospel was followed in that the aggrieved approached the Roberts one-on-one and that didn't work so they went to them with a few witnesses and that didn't work so they and the witnesses took it to the whole church and that didn't work so now it's public.
Sometimes, the high and mighty (in their own minds) make themselves unavailable for such attempts, in which case going public with it sooner is the only alternative to stop the corrupting behavior from spreading to the rest of the body.
Well, the people need to stop giving their tens of millions of dollars each year to all these fat-spirited televangelists and rather give such funds to those who will use them not to live in luxury but to live efficiently and efficaciously for the sake of the cause and movement of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, to bring forth that which is worthy of repentance, turning to God and making up for much of the damage done and healing the poor and the rest.
That's what the Real Liberal Christian Church is all about. That's what our Christian Commons Project is all about. The Commons and the Church are one and diametrically opposed to the greedy policies and practices of the major televangelists.
Won't you please stop giving them money and give it where it will really go to the solution for the poor and real Christians? We won't buy private jets or Rolex watches or spend tens of thousands of dollars a year on the wardrobe of one person or buy huge SUV's or Mercedes convertibles and anything of the sort. We will spend your donations on practical things with an eye to getting the most for the money to bring forth the most we can to feed the lambs and sheep and to do all the rest of the Gospel message. We don't need to live lavishly. It's counter-productive. Until everyone has the basic necessities, how can anyone live in good conscience the way these televangelists and others with their incomes live?
We don't begrudge people every comfort. That would be Judas complaining about Mary rubbing the spices on Jesus's feet. You can be assured though that Jesus wasn't luxuriating all the time. When he went out into the desert mountains to fast for forty days and nights, he didn't take anything with him but the one set of clothes he was wearing. He slept in nature. Nature was his bed. Think about it. What a contrast when you look at the televangelists bragging about how many tens of thousands of square feet their single-family homes are. Really, if Judas were to go into those homes of those televangelist today to rebuke them, Jesus wouldn't come to the rescue of the televangelists.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze of discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)