I tend to have controlling tendencies. My first wife, my kids, my second present wife, as well as some very close friends have all told me this. Because of how I have seen how my controlling nature has damaged relationships with others, I have been open to God changing this aspect of my personality.  

The book, “I’m Okay – You’re Okay” by Thomas Harris, M.D. has helped me in my journey. I do not agree with everything he says in the book, but I have truly benefited from his following insights: 

People can choose to relate to others in one of three ways. They can choose to relate to them as a parent, as an adult or as a child. Generally speaking, all of us have a Parent, an Adult, and a Child within us, and each of our different kinds of relationships draws out these different approaches we take toward people. 

The Parent: When we choose to relate to others from the Parent within us, we treat everyone else like immature children. We feel superior to them and look down on them as our inferiors. We tell them how to think and what to do. We give pat “answers” and automatic “explanations” for everything that happens in their lives. We function as their judge, jury and executioner – even as the Holy Spirit! 

The Adult: When we choose to relate to others from the Adult perspective, we treat others with mutual respect. We try to understand what others are saying even before we state our own opinions. Instead of using “You…” statements, we try to use mostly “I feel…” statements. Even when we have strong convictions about certain topics, we admit to the possibility of being mistaken. 

The Child: When we choose to relate to people from the Child within us, we demand that everyone else conform to our beliefs and desires. We use various emotional techniques to try to manipulate others or shame them into doing what we want them to do - when and how we want them to act. When others do not service our needs or wants, we call them names, get sarcastic, stomp our foot, shut down, raise our voice, withdraw by leaving the room, etc. to show our disapproval of their lack of responding to us.  

One of the systemic social problems in churches run by pastor-kings instead of pastor-servants, is that pastor-kings usually relate to their staff and to their congregational members as a Parent to a Child. In my own life, I felt talked to as a child by parent-leaders more than once:   

“I told you never to come back here unless you were completely willing to submit to every part of the vision of this church!” (one of my former pastors to me upon my return to "his" church) 

“No, you shouldn’t have preached on that topic on Sunday night because I’m the one who makes the doctrines of this church!” (one of my former pastors to me after I preached a postmillennial-type of sermon during a Sunday night service) 

“I will counsel you and your wife only on the condition that you do not counsel with anyone else!” (one of my former pastors to me and my first wife when we needed marriage counseling)  

"We're going to have to talk if I'm going to allow you to start prophesying in my church!" (one of my former pastors to me after I prophesied in church) 

I take responsibility for my over-controlling nature. I do not blame my former pastors for it. Nevertheless, I have observed that over-controlling pastors seem to produce over-controlling staff members as well as over-controlling congregational members and associates. When I read the comments from “Vroom,” for example (2/6/07), in his response to one of my blog articles, I felt attacked by that same strong spirit of his Parent coming out toward me:  

“Why are you harping on it?” 

“Why are you complaining about it, you don't even go there.” 

“How do you really know PF preaches too much about money? Is that your opinion or God's? I personally could care less… Don't know where
you got your information and don't care…” 

“Why do you spend so much energy on this stuff, let it go and go do something for God.“ 

My hope is that I will become totally free from the over-controlling spirit of the Parent that is in me. I pray that I can learn how to care for others with genuine love and mutual respect even when I completely disagree with their ideas. I want to learn how to maintain my belief systems with an open mind without resorting to treating others as a parent would treat a child. I want to learn how to treat others as one adult would treat another.

Questions says: My general opinion of all MFI churches are that they are are a dusted-off, revived version of the 1970s discipleship movement of the Charismatic movement.

Questions: Excellent insight! Back in the 1970's, one of my former pastors had Juan Carlos Ortez, a leader of the discipleship movement in Argentina and author of the book, Disciple, came to Portland and spent several days talking in private to the church leadership and preaching in the church. Although I was not in those private meetings, I believe that they directly and strongly contributed to this church's increasing control over its people. If I'm not mistaken, it was after those meetings, that the leadership began making sure that everyone attended the home meetings "in their district" and was "under" their district pastor.

I have personally spoken with one of the Christian psychologists who was involved in counseling many of the leaders and victims of the Discipleship Movement because of their over-emphasis upon submission to spiritual authority and the doctrine of spiritual "covering." Thousands of Christians were exploited, hurt and abused, but, fortunately some, I was told, like Bob Mumford, publicly repented.

I remembered how I felt that this church's leadership used to criticize albeit subtly and question the Shepherding Movement's leaders (Ern Baxter, Bob Mumford, Derek Prince, Don Basham, Charles Simpson, and John Poole) for most of them not being pastors of traditional "local churches." (And yet the senior pastor would have they some of them come and minister at his church at times!) This church's leadership implied that their abuse of authority and power came about because they were not in traditional "local church" structures.  

In my view, this is a ridiculous half-truth. Authoritarianism and over-control is rampant - mainly through the spread of the Senior Pastor Cult - throughout the world - both in house churches as well as mega churches - both inside "local church" structures as well as outside of them. To me, it's not the structure, it's the heart of self-centeredness and a twisted ministry philosophy that drives this abuse of power. In my view, local churches like the one to which I am referring simply adopted the general views of the Discipleship Movement and began to practice them inside their own local church structures. They justified these practices by saying that they were implementing them into what they thought was the only "biblical" form of church: the "local church."

I find it interesting that, to my knowledge, MFI membership is open only to those pastors who practice "senior pastor" ministry. This raises a very interesting question: Why would the MFI leadership not encourage pastors of congregational and elder-run churches to join its ranks? ….Another interesting question is why, at least on the surface, does it appear that Charismatic and Pentecostal Christians are more prone to being both spiritual abusers as well as being spiritually abused than other Evangelical and Protestant groups?

No matter what the structure or group, however, I think we must always keep in mind the words of the apostle Peter who tells us what the true purpose of any Christian leadership is: "…not as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock…" (I Peter 5:3, NKJV) In my view, it is when leaders turn away from their true calling of humbly serving and being examples to the flock to getting money, power, volunteer (slave) labor and prestige from the flock that the doors to all forms of spiritual abuse open wide.

Note: There is an excellent article in The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Baker Book House) called, The Discipleship Movement (pgs. 319-320) which has a great bibliography for further reading. 

WhatHEsaid wrote: there is Sister Sue (name changed)… "I just read an article on CNN about her. She thinks I-35 highway through Texas is the road Isaiah was speaking of in chapter 35:8. Could I suggest a thorough reading of John 4:21-23? What is it about these OT prophet type ministries that makes them think certain places are “God spots”? I wonder what the $$$ angle will be on this."

WhatHEsaid: Great point about John 4:21-23 quashing the antiquated OT purity system idea, carried over in most religions (even Evangelical and Charismatic ones who promote Holy Land tours to “walk where Jesus walked”), of “holy sites,” “holy land” – the issue of sacred space.

Also great question about sacred space and the money angle! Anecdotally, if people could claim a divine revelation at the top of a mysterious mountain and then charge people money to come in and see the “exact spot” where the divine being appeared to them, they could start a new religion, proclaim themselves the new high priest, and make lots of money. Historically, Joseph Smith was able to make money and build a large denomination by using “Thus saith the Lord” prophecies to appoint a specific land for his followers. His “New Zion” eventually became the state of Utah. As I’ve been reading Mormon doctrine lately, it is literally full of claimed prophetic utterances from Joseph Smith. Did any of his church members ever seriously question his utterances of “revelation knowledge?”

In my view, the money angle is quite obvious when it comes to the preachers on some Christian television stations saying something like this, which I have heard many times: The Spirit quickened Psalm 78:12 to me for this meeting! He’s telling me that if you sow your financial seed of $78.12 to this ministry every month for this next year, he’s going to abundantly bless you!

I cannot speak to what may or may not be motivating Sister Sue, but in charismatic circles, “credibility” is many times based on claiming prophetic insights not only about the future but from the mundane life around you; the birds on the wire mean this, the rocks by the creek speak thus, the rainbow…the darkening eclipse…the falling stars…the moon turning to blood, etc. Thus, the more prophetic “insights” one has, the more credibility one gains (in certain circles anyway), the more credibility, the greater the following, the greater the following, the more invitations to conferences and thus more honorarium income and book sales. (Who speaks at a conference and does not bring their books and CDs to sell?)

In charismatic circles, since education and degrees are minimized in importance, so are intellectual approaches to the Bible, e.g., Hebrew, Greek, cultural background, historical scholarship, etc. Thus, some other phenomenon has to come in to fill the knowledge vacuum. Many times it is: “revelation knowledge!” I’ve heard many a TV preacher use this exact phrase in their preaching.

Christians need a good course in hermeneutics (the art and science of how to interpret the Bible). In my view, pastor/leaders, however, will not be interested in teaching such a course to their congregations lest God’s people get the tools to question what they hear on Sunday mornings! So, we are back to pastor/kings protecting their castle-domains again.

I don’t know whether this is true or not, but I was told that one pastor in our area stopped inviting Sister Sue to conferences at his church because she was prophesying over too many women in the church about how they were going to be sent “around the world for God.” If true, this could be quite unsettling for a pastor, especially when one promotes the idea that the “biblical  way” to be “sent out” is through the approval of the elders of one’s local church - and maybe asking for their financial support, too?! Monetary support, of course, translates into control. 

Charismatics also need to grow in their discernment and learn to test prophecies (I Thess. 5:21). Bob Jones and Larry Randolph (author of User-Friendly Prophecy) predicted in November of 2006 that there would be a great supernatural breakthrough on June 6, 2007.  It was to be a “crossing over into the Spirit realm” leading to great success and power in the Church (Supernatural Infusion Conference, Albany Vineyard, Albany, OR, Nov., 2006). Did it happen? I don’t know. People could seem to “prove it” or “disprove it” depending on what tiny part of the world they wanted to highlight… 

(For more on how the Bible is being used as a fund-raising mechanism see my article on this blog, A Pastor’s Black Bag of Tricks.)

On the other hand, some have made the opposite mistake of thinking that there is some special merit in being poverty stricken and have taken pride in that. As long as we are seeking our value in what we have or do not have on this earth, we do not understand God's purposes. God can choose to prosper with material wealth, or He can choose not to. Our focus needs to be on Him and His purposes for us—whether we are rich or poor. Since we are His, all that we have is also His, to be used for His purposes. Jesus tells all of us, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also" (Matthew 6:19-21).

Question: Do Christians need Bible scholars? Should Christians take time to read Bible dictionary articles and Bible commentaries or should they stick to the easier to read popular paperbacks?  Would it be better for believers just to spend their time in prayer getting revelation directly from the Holy Spirit rather than actually studying the Bible? Join Hungry on the Harbor and I as we discuss these important questions: 

Hungry on the Harbor asks: [When it comes to the Bible] what exactly is it that is supposed to be taught? 

Hungry: We are to teach the whole Bible to the whole Church. In my view, each section of the Bible has some beneficial knowledge for Christians to help them live for Jesus Christ. A problem with many churches is the topical sermon approach: the pastor-king can select whatever he wants to put together sometimes casting a spell of false doctrine over an entire congregation. More challenging is expository preaching/teaching through the Bible. The plus is that it is a little bit more difficult for a preacher to concoct false doctrine that way, but the challenge is not to make it too routine. 

Hungry on the Harbor asks: Has humanity changed so much that we need scholarly tools and 'Bible specialists' to tell us what the word of God says? 

Hungry: Humanity is still sinful like it has been from the beginning of time. Yes, we need scholars and scholarly tools to help us interpret the Bible. Are they equal to God? No. Can the average Christian get edified from the Bible without them? Yes. But, how else would we know many things, e.g., that the social structure of ancient Israel (high priestly families, priests, Levites, congregation) was based on its temple purity system which saw the holies of holies as the most sacred of all places and everything away from it as moving in lesser levels of holiness? Thus, there was a religious justification for social stratification and the accumulation of wealth at the top of this social pyramid. Sure, the Holy Spirit could show this social fact to a sincere Christian, but have you ever heard of him showing someone this insight by revelation rather than study? 

Hungry on the Harbor queries: Do you think God is pleased to see how complicated His word has become… 

Hungry: If God is the author of His word, then to follow your logic, are we not able to say that it is his own fault that the Bible has become so complicated? ;  )  The Bible is shown to be very complicated in some circles but does that mean that we run away and hide in our personal closets of anti-intellectualism? When I have a scholarly question, I go to a scholar for an answer. When I have a prophetic question, I go to a prophet for an answer. When I have a psychological question, I go to a psychologist for an answer. When I have a pastoral question, I go to a pastor for an answer. The trouble with the Senior Pastor cult is that too many senior pastors try to function in all of these realms themselves and they fail. We need every gift in the Body of Christ. 

Hungry on the Harbor queries: …that once again the 'scholars' believe the average readers of the scriptures can't understand them enough to really benefit? 

Hungry: Which scholar did you quote here to support your thought? Scholars are professionals just like any other profession. Just because they publish their articles using Hebrew, Greek, Latin, French and German terms in scholarly journals that most of us never read does not mean that they think that the average reader cannot benefit from reading the Bible! The challenge is that scholars should be willing to submit their ideas to the discernment of the average Christian reader just as much as the average Christian reader should be willing to allow his revelations to be critiqued by scholars. Paul did not leave anyone out when he said, “Test all things; hold fast that which is good.” 

Hungry on the Harbor asks: Aren't we perpetuating the myth of hierarchical importance of a man? 

Hungry: The undo exaltation of a human being can and does happen in all walks of life. Some people swear by their family doctor only to find out later that he received little or no training in basic nutrition while in medical school. Some Christians believe everything their pastor says over the pulpit even though too many read popular paperbacks rather than dig into deeper Bible reference works. Something is a “myth” only if it turns out not to be true. Why not read what scholars have to say and then, if you disagree with them, give your reasons? Isn’t this what good education is all about – even Christian education? 

Hungry on the Harbor says: … which too often means [that we make the Bible say] what we want it to say. 

Hungry: Everybody makes the Bible say what he or she wants it to say at times. Some do this more often than others, and we all have to guard against it. In an effort to avoid this kind of over-subjectivism is the reason why scholars submit their articles to their peers for critique both before and after publication. Unfortunately, I haven’t observed too much of this in the Senior Pastor cult. I remember once when a certain senior pastor had me read a paper he had written on Jeremiah. After I read it, I told him that, in my view, the paper left a lot of room for improvement. He never asked my opinion again. Why? It appeared to me that he didn’t really want constructive input, he just wanted a pat on the back.  

Hungry on the Harbor writes: I used to think more 'scholarly' in my views, I remember about 8-9 years ago paraphrasing the entire book of 1 John… and writing all my gleanings down…I was so proud of myself. 

Hungry: I would like to read your paraphrase of I John sometime. I’ll bet that it’s very edifying. May I ask, why do you think less “scholarly” in your views now? Maybe the Holy Spirit is emphasizing a different season in your life. I believe that he does this: at times, he calls us deeply into prayer and Bible meditation without any other books; at other times, he will call us to go to the library and read many articles or books on a certain topic. In my view, it all depends on what spiritual season we find ourselves in. I think it’s good that you wrote all or your thoughts down on paper. How do you know that the Lord will not want to use those gleanings in the future? You said you were so proud of yourself for doing so. One does not have to become proud through studying and note taking. Pride tends to come when we think that we don’t need the other gifts in the Body to balance and complement our own; also, when we think that we know all that there is to know about something. In I Cor. 8:1-3,  verse 2 corrects or balances out verse 1c, the verse commonly quoted by anti-intellectual Charismatics.  

Hungry on the Harbor says: The very best way to study the Bible is with a concordance and the Bible. 

Hungry: Studying the Bible with a concordance is a good start, but if one limits oneself to that, many pitfalls await. I mentioned this in an earlier blog: the main Bible study method that one of my favorite Bible teachers in Bible college still uses is the concordance. He goes through various books of the Bible and looks up every key word in an English concordance and categorizes them. When this teacher first showed me this method, I was indeed impressed, but as I began to expand my study skills, I began to see its clear limitations if not dangers. Briefly: 

(1) If you use an English concordance, e.g., Strong’s, you will miss many of the same Hebrew or Gk words that are simply translated differently. Using New Englishman’s Greek or Hebrew Concordance is better because they give you every place the Heb or Gk words is used in the text no matter how it has been translated. 

(2) The concordance method by itself does not provide the student with the historical, grammatical or cultural background of the text. The simple fact is that we cannot understand the Bible properly without studying it in context. 

(3) This method actually can give the student many false views of Scripture because it compresses worlds of meaning into a list of words. E.g. just recently I corresponded with one of my former teachers in Bible college about his published beliefs on tithing. In his last email to me, he said that I needed to go through my concordance on every verse in the Bible on tithing to try to get a more accurate picture of it. I have done that, and it was a start, but in my forthcoming book, I hope that I can demonstrate that just like going down one’s concordance will not get you to the truth about tithing, neither is it the complete answer for any other question a sincere believer might ask. 

(4) The student is falsely taught to read back into the text (eisegete) the symbolic or metaphorical meaning from one reference in the NT that is said to “interpret” most, if not all, of the others. E.g., just because “leaven’ has a negative meaning in I Cor 5:8, it does not necessarily have that same meaning in the OT sacrifices that contained it. This is why, in my view, Kevin Conner’s book, The Symbols and the Types, contains some good insights, but since it was built on the concordance method, is more of an exercise in plays with similar English words rather than solid biblical interpretation which is available in scholarly Bible dictionaries and commentaries. 

Here is part of an interesting blog about the mega-church, Willow Creek, and its highly popular seeker-friendly ministry philosophy. This excerpt is from a blog hosted by the editors of Leadership Journal. If interested, look for Willow Creek Repents Part 2 on the same site: 

…Having put all of their eggs into the program-driven church basket you can understand their shock when the research revealed that “Increasing levels of participation in these sets of activities does NOT predict whether someone’s becoming more of a disciple of Christ. It does NOT predict whether they love God more or they love people more.”

Speaking at the Leadership Summit, Hybels summarized the findings this way:

Some of the stuff that we have put millions of dollars into thinking it would really help our people grow and develop spiritually, when the data actually came back it wasn’t helping people that much. Other things that we didn’t put that much money into and didn’t put much staff against is stuff our people are crying out for.

Having spent thirty years creating and promoting a multi-million dollar organization driven by programs and measuring participation, and convincing other church leaders to do the same, you can see why Hybels called this research “the wake up call” of his adult life.

Hybels confesses:

We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become ‘self feeders.’ We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their bible between service, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own….

In Part II, Greg Hawkins responds to the question:

Is Willow Re-thinking its Seeker Focus?

Simple answer – no. My boss would say that Willow is not just seeker-focused. We are seeker-obsessed. The power of REVEAL’s insights for our seeker strategy is the evangelistic strength uncovered in the more mature segments. If we can serve them better, the evangelistic potential is enormous, based on our findings.

source: www.blog.christianitytoday.com/outofur/archives/2007/10/willow_creek

Havis writes: "…tithing is a part of my covenant relationship with God. Covenants are made and confirmed with tokens. Jesus brings his blood to the covenant and I (being of the seed of Abraham) bring the 10th part of my blessing to Jesus as Abraham brought his 10th part to Melchizedek. I say it, over and over, again and again, I do not tithe because someone has constrained me and told me that I must tithe. I tithe because I want to. I love tithing. I have faithfully and lovingly tithed for more than 45 years. It is one of the most pleasurable things I do in life me."  (June 8, 2007)

To say that tithing is a part of your covenant relationship with God since you are a son of Abraham by faith in Jesus Christ is, at first glance, an admirable admission. After all, should not all believers follow in the footsteps of Abraham, the father of the faith? It is also admirable when you say that you have "faithfully and lovingly tithed for more than 45 years. It is one of the most pleasurable things I do in life me." 

Havis: I would like to submit to you a few thoughts:   

(1) You say that in your covenant relationship with God, “Jesus brings his blood” and “I bring the tithe.” This gives the impression that your covenant relationship with God is not based solely on grace through faith in the blood of Christ, but on a mixture of Christ’s blood and your tithe. I know you say that you tithe voluntarily, which implies that it is not a covenant condition, but it still sounds dangerous to me. 

(2) You say that you tithe since you are a part of “the seed of Abraham.” It is true that Paul calls all believers the sons and daughters of Abraham by their faith in Jesus Christ. However, not one NT writer ever connects being the seed of Abraham with tithing. As RP has asked you: do you also consider circumcision as part of your covenant relationship with God since it was the sign of God’s covenant with him? 

(3) When you tell us that you have "faithfully and lovingly tithed for more than 45 years. It is one of the most pleasurable things I do in life me,” I think it’s good that you’re sharing, but I feel you need to consider not becoming like the Pharisee who went to the temple and was so proud of his tithing record (Luke 18:12). Jesus says that our giving should be in secret (Matthew 6:1-4).   

(4) In another post, you raise the question of the everlasting covenant and its relationship to the Abrahamic and New Covenants. In my view, all previous covenants, along with all of their “tokens,” have been fulfilled and abolished in Jesus Christ and the New Covenant in his blood. I think that the Book of Hebrews makes this very clear. To imply that tithing was a part of the everlasting covenant before Genesis 14:20 has no scriptural support.

“I believe The City Church in Seattle has a gift and ministry of giving to the body of Christ. We have been blessed with more than enough! But there are two reasons we have been blessed. One is that we ask every member of our church to tithe. Therefore the blessing of God and the open windows of heaven are always functioning among our people. There is no curse upon us. Secondly, we are blessed because our church keeps giving money away. Each year we give away over 20 percent of our church’s income.” Wendell Smith, Prosperity with a Purpose, The City Church, Kirkland, Washington, 2005, p. 214 

Wendell Smith's book is dangerous. Both solid biblical exegesis and balanced biblical theology are missing. Instead, Wendell devotes many pages to an overly-simplistic list of key words and verses that mention financial prosperity, e.g., "riches," "wealth," "silver," "gold," "gems," "firstfruits," "hundredfold," "lands," "luxury," "bankers," "thousand," "tithes," "money," etc. (pgs. 73-123). (Wendell’s friend, Frank Damazio, uses the same technique in Releasing Financial Provision, pgs. 331-378.) Using such lists, and the total numbers of their occurences in the Bible to prove a point without exegesis and theology is not only lazy but a wrong and immature use of Scripture. It would be similar to saying that Jesus is not interested in the Church since he only uses the word "church" (ekklesia) two times in the gospels (Mt. 16:18; 18:17). 

Wendell also lists out quotes in favor of wealth not only from Christian sources but also pagan ones e.g., Euripides and Aeschylus, Greek playwrights, Thucydides, the Greek aristocrat, and Confucius, the Chinese philosopher (pgs. 271-285). In response to the hard questions about Christians and wealth, it is noteworthy that Wendell addresses some of them, but his responses are too short and superficial (pgs. 261-270).  

The theme of book can be summed up in one phrase: more money, more ministry. In my view, the book is really Wendell’s personal testimony of how he has accumulated at The City Church, as one of Wendell’s relatives told me: “more money than he knows what to do with.” 

Is the wealth of The City Church, all due to the blessing of God? Not necessarily. The King County/Lake Washington area, where The City Church is located, is one of the wealthiest areas in the country. Bill Gates, the richest man in the world, lives on Lake Washington. In 2005, the median household income in King County was $58,370. Out of 3,141 counties or county equivalents in the nation, King County ranks as approx. the 105th richest county according to median household incomes (census.gov). 

Let’s do church income by the numbers: Pick a wealthy location to plant a church, require all of your church members to tithe, strongly encourage all of your members to give many, many offerings above the tithe, and Voila! Millions of dollars!  

In light of this fact, and not just “the blessing of God,” Wendell can tell in his book how more than once someone in his church wrote out a check for $1,000,000.  In light of this economic demographic, people have to realize, that just because a church’s income is in the multiplied millions, it does not necessarily mean that it is because they are preaching the “truth” about prosperity or because they are “obedient with the tithe so that the windows of heaven are opened” for them by God. 

Besides demographics, the other critical factor as Wendell himself admits as a reason for such wealth accumulation, is that Wendell asks (requires?!) all of their church members to tithe, as well as to give offerings above their tithe. Someone on this blog posted that Wendell does not allow any of the members of The City Church to counsel with anyone on church staff unless they are known to be a faithful tither. If true, can you imagine the kind of pressure and expectation that such an unbiblical practice places upon all of the members of The City Church to tithe?! If accurate, are we to deem such manipulative practices appropriate because they are producing such a large revenue stream? If only because they are producing "results," have we become pragmatists, worshipping at the altar of the “whatever-works” philosophy of John Dewey, rather than Christians following Jesus to the foot of the cross?  Do the "ends" of more ministry justify the "means" used to raising more money for it?  

The Mormons have used the same fund-raising techniques of the mandatory tithe and additional offerings for many years. They have accrued the same result: millions of dollars to build their many meeting houses (called “stakes”) and temples debt-free! Is the material prosperity of the Mormons a clear indication that God himself is “blessing” them and directly helping them to take their message of salvation by good works all around the world?  

My warning to those leaders and Christians who do not know the Bible very well and inwardly long for all of the benefits that wealth (mammon) can bring is not to look only upon the surface of lists of Bible words and verses along with the high-income numbers in The City Church and in other prosperity churches and try to follow suit. Dig deeper in the Word. 

I fear that too many Christians will forget the fact that king Solomon had all the wealth that The City Church has and much more, and it was not because he always walked with God or tithed but because he developed lucrative international commerce in his wealthy corner of the world, and, even more critically, because he raised the mandatory taxes on the people of Israel to benefit his own temple state.