SECRETS OF WEALTH
As Christians, it is of course God’s
will for us to prosper and to be wealthy. Apologetics and so many other groups
of Christians try to dispute this fact, flinging the ‘leave all worldly
possesions’ theory on us. They are of course mistaken. To leave all worldly
possession is to be firstly, stark naked, hungry and in the open. Literally, be
a mad person. For such I always love to point out something.
1 Cor 13:3
If I gave everything I
have to poor people, and if I were burned alive for preaching the Gospel but
didn't love others, it would be of no value whatever.
TLB
That isn’t a criteria for holiness
and righteousness. There is so much in God that we must walk in. Realms of
glory and power and dominion. If we do not function in this, we would be
frustrating the grace of God. Sin is an anomaly and as such, I daresay that it
will be a sin for the Christian not to be wealthy. A daring statement
maybe, nevertheless true. The bible says,
Rom 3:23
For all have sinned, and
come short of the glory of God;
KJV
We can therefore conclude that Sin
is anything short of God’s glory. There is a standard in God. This standard is
his glory and there are various reams of this glory. We move from glory to
greater levels of glory. But there is a baseline in this glory that anything
short of it is Sin.
It is easy for many to agree that
God has a standard, but they will speedily cover up such standards with moral
laws. I will like to shake your belief in that regard to say this, Righteousness
is not morality. Saul was punished and rejected because he didn’t fully
obey an order to kill and destroy every man, woman, child, baby (plus those
still in the belly), animal etc in Amalek. I know, many Christians do not like
to read that part and will readily blast the Muslim fellows for their venomous
actions. Like a friend once wrote. “Its about who has the hottest hell”.
David on the other hand, killed a
man after sleeping with his wife. This to my moral standard is worse than Saul’s
sin. To me, Saul didn’t even sin, he had mercy. But what do I know? That is the
kind of thought pattern a religious Christian will have if he comes across such
experience. But then, Righteousness is not morality. God is righteous, he is
just. All that he says is right. His judgement are true and right. Anything
contrary is false. This is the absolute reality. By the Grace of God, I will
again visit the issue of the Righteousness of God on this blog, if God permits.
But let us go back to the topic on Wealth.
I have been trying to prove from
above that Sin is a nature, a condition, a place and position of being short of
God’s glory. God’s glory is perfect and true. Anything short of it is Sin. It
is therefore an aberration for the Christian to be poor, because poverty is one
of the principal thing Christ dealt with on the Cross. He came to take away
poverty and other sorrows. Glory be to God!
Lets define wealth first, so we can
understand the line and manner I am taking. But to do that, it is imperative to
define poverty first in order to herald the definition of wealth.
“Poverty is the condition where
your resources is less than your need. It is a position of lack and
insufficiency in relation to your accumulated need”
So poverty is not when you have
N2,000 in your account nor when you have one cloth. Poverty is defined relative
to your need. Wealth on the other hand is defined thus:
“Wealth is the condition,
position and nature of abundant resources over accumulated need. It exhibits
superiority and sufficiency in settling need and having left over”
So wealth is not when you
accumulate N200 million, or have so many material resources. If in relation to
your need, your resources are not insufficient, then you are definitely not
wealthy. And if a man has N2,000 and his needs are at most priced, N1,000 he is
richer than a man with N2 million who has a need of over N10 million. The
latter is poor while the former is rich.
Having defined this, I will let you
take this in and to prepare for the next phase where we will discuss how to be
wealthy.
God bless you exceedingly.
Comments
Post a Comment