"Brands" of the Gospel?

Oohh... for those with weak stomachs - BEWARE!

I read an article on Joel Osteen and how his prosperity message is fairing in an economic downturn. Surprising really.

So, here is a brief excerpt, the part you may not want to read...

"... there is no denying that his message, and his marketing of that message, is getting out to the world while so many other pastors are preaching to empty pews. Osteen dismisses the notion that he has watered down the Scriptures to win over worshippers. “It’s who we are,” he says. “The accessibility of my message doesn’t bother me a bit. Look, we deal with people who are fighting cancer, fighting to save their marriages, dealing with the death of loved ones. I don’t think they need to be beaten down. And I think the success of the message in the marketplace is because we are optimistic, encouraging.” Phil Cooke, a longtime colleague and the author of Branding Faith, says, “Oprah has a brand, Nike has a brand, and Joel Osteen has a brand. Joel has made his brand the inspiration brand.”

Pardon me, but since when did we get to own the gospel of Jesus Christ and profit from our "brand?" "But didn't Paul call it his own gospel" you say. Let's see it in context:

Romans 16:25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— 27 to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.

2 Timothy 2:8 Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, the offspring of David, as preached in my gospel, 9 for which I am suffering, bound with chains as a criminal. But the word of God is not bound! 10 Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

So, in both occurances of "my gospel" (the closest thing I can find to a "brand" of the gospel), Paul mentions preaching. This is significant because what it shows us is that Paul is describing what he personally preached - the good news (gospel). Never is it used in such a way as to be distinct from other (true) gospels (as if there were any other gospel, Gal 1).

Further, Paul was in fact one of the first to carry the gospel message to the non-Jews. Ephesians 3 talks about how the good news was entrusted by God to Paul to take to the Gentiles - a fairly novel idea at the time. So in a sense, he did have something unique, but unique in who he delivered it to, not in content.

Galatians 1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant [2] of Christ.

Why do some "Christians" feel the need to follow another gospel? Maybe they've never heard the true gospel - that Jesus emptied himself of all of His glory as God to take on humble human flesh, that He died a horrible death on the Cross to be a substitute in our place because of the idolatry we do, and that He is going to fully restore all things in this creation to a glorious state.

Or, maybe they just don't like that Gospel.

Your thoughts? Any Rev. Feel Good fans want to chime in?

Can the "End" Justify the "Means?"

I've had this thought lingering in my head for probably a year now, so it's time to air it out.

If someone were to ask me to define "God," my answer might include this (among other things): "He is the only Being in all of what exists who justifies the means He uses by the end which He designs." In other words, it seems to me that God, in pursuing His own glory and in seeking to make His people happy in Him by making His glory known to them, can do anything He pleases to that end because He is the only wise and Sovereign. He had the Son murdered (God designed the means) and gets glory for it (the means serves the ultimate end). With respect to the cross, He is just (His end - His glorious character being known) and the justifier of the ungodly (the means for obtaining praise was the unthinkable - the ungodly treated by holy God as though godly).

This puts gladness in my heart toward Him! He is so far above me, yet so kind toward me. My means could never be justified by the end they serve - I think the reason for this lies in the fact that I do not know God's hidden will; I only know His revealed will.

How wonderful it is to rest in the arms of the One ruling over the universe, governing exactly what happens to me, suprised by nothing.

Patriotic Sundays

Is there a place for the church to hold a "worship service" commemorating those who put their lives on the line for our national freedom? Is it appropriate to celebrate the blessings God has given us through this country as a part of the "worship service?"

Find out my brother's thoughts at Wipe the Sleep from My Eyes.