Prosperity Teachers and Old Testament Texts pt. 4

In this video, we are discussing Isaiah 53 and prosperity teachers use of this text to justify guaranteed divine healing. This passage is perhaps prosperity teachers greatest proof text for promoting the notion that God wants you to be totally healthy and live a long suffering free life. While this sounds good and appealing, is this what the Scriptures really mean when they say "by His stripes you were healed"? Check out this video and post your thoughts, ideas, agreements, disagreements, and comments.

Prosperity Teachers and Old Testament Texts pt.3

(Pardon the funny face in the video...yes, I did it on purpose lol...its called passion) In this video, I want to see how prosperity teachers use the book of Job to justify their teachings. Many times, instead of facing the text for what it says, prosperity teachers go to great lengths to convince their listeners that Job's sufferings were unique and were not ultimately from God, while at the same time, they will easily affirm God's great blessing on Job's life. I look at quotes from Kenneth Copeland and Joseph Prince in this video to see how their teaching compares to scripture. Below are the links to the articles and sermon which I quoted from: Acting in Fear: A Look at Job's Life - Kenneth Copeland Satan Cannot Come Before God - Joseph Prince Why Good People Suffer - Answers from Job's Story - Joseph Prince Religion Doesn't Help You, Faith Does - Kenneth Copeland

Prosperity Teachers and the Old Testament pt. 2

 In this video, I am continuing to answer the question "How do prosperity teachers use Old Testament texts to justify their teachings?" Deuteronomy 28 is a popular passage that many prosperity teachers use to show that obedience to God's Word merits financial and material prosperity. On the contrary, prosperity teachers believe that the curse spoken about in Deuteronomy is the curse of the law and is essentially poverty and that this curse comes through disobedience to God's word. What does the Bible say about this passage and how we should properly interpret it? Let me know your thoughts, comments, agreements, and disagreements.