Recent messages on Facebook have directed me to an interesting article by the "Logical Christian". He's probably a lot more popular than be judging from the number of comments he gets. I'll try to drop him a message about joining Heart for God. This is not a war, not a fight against New Creation or the Pastor Prince ministry but let's put into proper perspective some things. First let me start with an article that was written a couple of days before Pastor Prince hit the news. Whether conincidental or timely revelation, I think it deserves a second read. Why can't Pastors be financially blessed?
NCC had an official response. Doesn't address the issue biblically but instead chose to focus on being legally right. Let me describe the difference. Legally right under the law of man does not make things biblically right. Correctly audited accounts and rewards fairly awarded through a council/board of directors or whatever name you choose to call it. Does not make what you do biblically right. What defines biblically right is the word of God.
Doing good does not get you to heaven, just as doing good does not justify being paid well, not in God's eyes at least. Your giving and God's blessings are 2 separate matters not to be mixed. Having a 19,000 congregation or raising millions of dollars for the church is separate from the $500k that Pastor Prince receives as PERSONAL remuneration. Why I decided to caps personal cause clearly there was intent to mix this remuneration with his giving to church etc... Unfortunately it doesn't mask the fact that he has a (incredibly) nice car and (envious) properties. One fit for a CEO of a MNC. Question is did Paul or anyone in the bible called to do the work of God had such possessions? David had, Soloman had, but they were kings. So are we now saying that Pastor Prince is not a servant of the God's work but runs a nation like a King or owns a business like a CEO?
Let me now come back to the "Parable" of the $500k chef. Missing from the equation here is the relation of the chef and the clients and the relation of Christians in the church and the Pastor. The "Parable" had a clear intention to deceive. The chef and the client is what you would call legally right. You pay what you want and the boss decides whatever he wants to pay the chef. Sure nice and fair.
Coming back to pastoral work. It's about feeding the congregation (sure... like what the chef does) but not as a chef of a restaurant but more like a brother to your sibling. Now what if some of the older siblings of the lot decided that since you work for God (the parent) you should get paid. And decided the eldest sibling who cooks best and the most often and manages the family funds (of millions) should be paid $500k. So now he gladly accepts the money, buys himself the best clothes, car and house and says our Father made us the head and not the tail and therefore this is what I deserve.
2 questions come to mind.
- Why did the older siblings decide to reward the eldest sibling in such a lavish way? In this reward system did they have personal gains as well. Note the similarity in the 2 others that escaped attention despite taking more than $200k a year.
- Would the father of the family have rewarded the eldest sibling that way had he been around? Is reward tied to how well he cooked and how many siblings he fed?
