book, Brian, Brian Houston, capitalism, church, finances, greed, Hillsong, Hillsong Church, houston, money, You Need More Money
Brian Houston wrote a provocative book called ‘You Need More Money’ in the year 2000. While he has pulled this book off the shelf, there has been no public notification that he has repented of his false beliefs. While he may show embarrassment that he wrote it – this is not an indicator that he has changed his views. Therefore, we believe it is in our best interest to disclose the information within it’s pages.
Below is the introduction to his book, ‘You Need More Money’:
“I’m going to get straight to the point: YOU NEED MORE MONEY!
You may think this provocative, presumptuous, or prophetic coming from a pastor but the fact is that it is true. Whoever you are, you need more money.
I know that money is a highly sensitive subject for anyone, but in this book I am going to tell you WHY you need more money and secondly HOW you can get more money (even if you won’t admit it, I bet you are interested in the latter). I don’t believe that we should be uncomfortable talking about something that plays such an enormous role in our day-to-day lives.
People love to quote the Bible when it comes to money, wealth and riches (and will sometimes do so out of context), but there is a fascinating verse in the book of Ecclesiastes that says it all:
A feast is made for laughter, and wine makes merry; but money answers everything.
If that’s a shock to see a statement like that in the Bible—check it out for yourself. That is exactly what it says: MONEY ANSWERS EVERYTHING!
Now I believe the Bible has all the answers to life. It contains the wisdom of the ages, eternal principles and practical counsel for any situation. In fact, the more you read the Bible, the more truths you keep discovering. It is a book that I have been reading continually over four decades now … and there is always something fresh and relevant to find every day.
MONEY ANSWERS EVERYTHING
It is really interesting that Solomon, in his renowned wisdom, makes a statement like that. Think about it for a moment. Money certainly provides solutions and has tremendous power to change situations, making a big difference in people’s lives. It’s true – money is inevitably the bottom line of everything.
- What is the answer to hunger? Money! But you may say “what about food?” But you need money to buy it.
- What is the short-term solution to poverty? Money!
- What is the answer to powerlessness in your life? Money! It enables you to be influential.
While money provides many positive solutions, money also has just as many negative responses.
- How do you feed a heroin addiction? Money!
- What is listed as one of the greatest causes for marriage failure? Money!
We live in a world where almost everything relates to money, yet money in itself isn’t bad. This book deals with the real issue – people’s attitude and thinking towards money.
If you and I can change our thinking and develop a healthy attitude towards money, I believe we can all walk in the blessing and prosperity that God intends for us. We will never have a problem with money again.
Oh what a tangled web you weave, Steve/Facelift.
Paul Aletheia says: 1 August 2014 at 11:58 pm
“Steve, you obviously have some hidden agenda or you are paid to do this. You are not even from Australia but are pretending to care about a church in Melbourne. Your arguments are childish and lame. You do not read and accept when you are clearly shown to be in the wrong and so you if you continue in this path, you will no longer be allowed to comment on this blog. This is your final warning.” P.A.
I wonder what the moderator of “Exposing Error” would think if he knew about Steve’s use of various pseudonyms, and history on other sites?
“God hates those who spread discord amongst the brethren. How much more those who encourage strife anonymously? That is called subterfuge.
So why the secrecy? Do you fear expulsion, being ostracised? Where’s the courage of your conviction to even face this if you are indeed correct? Everything that is hidden will be exposed, according to Jesus, so why are you waiting for it to come from anything but your own strength of purpose? Do you doubt the very validity of your own cause by your reluctance to put a name to your claims?
Clearly this anonymity disqualifies you from comment, let alone judgement of another Christian. Why is this? Because we who are testing your spirit for what you say do not know your true motives, or who you are, or what your credentials are for public judgment of an elder.”
I laughed and laughed until I stopped.
Hi everybody! It’s strange that your current post talks about this Baptist Church in Melbourne with that controversial blog site – I stumbled upon their blog only a few days ago, (before I came across this blog,) and sent the authors an encouraging email. It’s not easy to take a stand against an erring elder, and don’t I know it!
I was forced out of a church years ago because of two ‘erring elders’, who were subsequently defrocked (publicly) never to return, by the leadership who came from regional headquarters. To me, that was a happy ending, but it doesn’t always end up that way.
Quite often, discerning people within a local congregation come up against the “Diotrophes” factor* – a strong individual who is really a tyrant, who casts people out of the church for merely questioning the goings on (doctrine, practice, finances etc) so it makes it that much harder to call people out for their sins, when they assume a leadership role.(*see 3 John 1:9) “Diotrophes’ is often the local ‘pastor’, but he probably shouldn’t be one, should he?
I believe that the first thing that has to be established in a situation like the MBCP one, is whether the “elder” being called into question actually qualifies to be an elder in the first place. This means that he must hold to sound doctrine, as well as having all the moral and character aspects of the role, in order too.
If going to the Hillsong conference was a mistake, then this Baptist pastor should have just said so publicly, and gotten on with it, but if he doggedly defended his stance over that issue and won’t back down, then perhaps his teaching and behaviour should come under closer scrutiny…
It’s a slam dunk that the Hillsong conference would not be teaching “sound doctrine” of any kind…
@ churchwatcher – it seems they recognised an unpleasant troll pretty quickly, It’s hard for a leopard to change its spots.
Jeremiah 13:22-24 “If you say in your heart, ‘Why have these things happened to me?’ Because of the magnitude of your iniquity Your skirts have been removed And your heels have been exposed. Can the Ethiopian change his skin Or the leopard his spots? Then you also can do good Who are accustomed to doing evil. 24″Therefore I will scatter them like drifting straw To the desert wind.…”
Leopard Tamer said:
How right you are Berean – and here is a crystal clear ‘close up’ of just what this “leopard” looks like, when he’s got his C3 spots glued into position…
Care of the ‘Wayback’ machine, and a poster named “fly-on-the-wall”
shared at this link:
And of course the problem, from Steve’s perspective, is ALWAYS the congregation, never the leadership. Sound familiar?
In fact, on reading the comments…
1. Steve is asking a very small faction, maybe ten anonymous contributors, within the congregation, for an explanation for their anonymous rebuke of their own pastor and congregation.
2. The general congregation is accused of nothing, but rather being defended. Only a small faction is being questioned.
3.The pastor is neither being defended nor accused.
4. Steve, in one comment, says he doesn’t think the blog owner isn’t saved, but that his anonymity means that it canon be verified that he is.
5. Steve, presumably, uses Steve’s own name and is not anonymous.
6. The owner of the blog hides behind a pseudonym to accuse his pastor and congregation.
7. The blog owner is reluctant to reveal how he got hold of church emails, and whether they were voluntarily passed on to him.
8. The blog owner is reluctant to set out scripture and verse which authorises his anonymous public rebuke of a named pastor.
The blog is a real eye opener, and demonstrates a resemblance to other similar blogs which target individual churches and their leaders. This is quite a recent phenomenon which I expect will grow in momentum across the Church spectrum, so it’s worthwhile observing how they will develop a certain pattern.
It is also fascinating to see how the same justification for anonymous criticism by owners and their group-think surfaces. I am also interested in the way narratives evolve in the course of time as they run out of subjects by which to level accusations.
john john said:
i reluctantly read Steve/Facelift/Gordy’s repetitive comments. he even demands that the blog author “prove they are saved.”
Steve/Facelift/Gordy, who are you to demand that?
has anyone demanded on your woodchuck blog to prove you are saved?
ask the leaders of your fantasy world… phil pringle and brian houston…. if they are saved.
then, take your own hypocritcal advice:
conclusion: someone must’ve grilled Steve/Facelift/Gordy when he was a pastor. now, scarred for life, his complex shows up whenever anyone questions any so-called pastor.
It turns out that, in the course of the discussion, one of the church leaders offered to meet with the blog anonymi to discuss their concerns face to face. I would call that a result.
Peacemaking isn’t all about saying nothing, is it? And it takes both sides to come to the table, identify themselves, and discuss their concerns in a civil manner.
Maybe you could take a leaf out of that book with your concerns about Hillsong.
If you actually read through the comments with an open mind, Steve never asked them to ‘prove’ they were saved, by the way. He said their anonymity made it difficult to confirm that they were saved. There is a big difference.
The rest of what you claim in your comment is speculation.
“If you actually read through the comments with an open mind, Steve never asked them to ‘prove’ they were saved, by the way. He said their anonymity made it difficult to confirm that they were saved. There is a big difference.”
We are glad Steve is calling them out for being anonymous. Good on him! Fancy being anonymous on blogs?
So Gordy, are you praying that Steve doesn’t act hypocritically, deceitfully and double-minded on the internet?
It’s good to see Steve has a friend of high integrity like you covering for him. Loyalty like that is rare to see these days. Keep it up Gordy!
Steve needs all the help he can get.
Here’s a relevant clip RE the misuse of Matthew 18 (yet again):
Mike Abendroth must have decided to skype Gordy/Facelift/Steve personally after he read the MBPC blog, having recognized the tone and style of a troll?
I think the point being made isn’t that it’s wrong to use a pseudonym. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using a pen-name to comment on a blog, or any number of noms de plume. I don’t think there are any rules to this, are there, especially if we are merely discussing scripture, or doctrine, or methodology and the like, or any subject under the sun?
So be anonymous if it suits your cause, as long as you allow the person you are disputing the same courtesy.
But the point Steve is making, and does so several times, is that it is unbiblical to anonymously accuse a named pastor in a public forum, especially of that pastor is the anonymous person’s pastor, and that anonymous person is also rebuking the congregation.
The Bible is clear. We shouldn’t bring an accusation against an elder except by two or three witnesses.
But this is clearly not through being anonymous, or by the use of anonymously written emails to the congregation, or on an anonymous, public blog dedicated to the rebuke of that named pastor and his congregation. That is ethically wrong, and Biblically unsustainable.
So, horses for courses.
Of course, you all can do what you like. This is a WordPress world where the anonymous thrive and the rules of engagement are being rewritten. In fact, for some, there are no rules, that is, as long as you do not wantonly defame a person.
The way I see it, Steve was just asking Christians if they would be better off doing things Biblically, since they are members of a Baptist assembly who base their claims against that pastor on the correct use of doctrine and scriptural instruction.
Surely they need to hold themselves to the same standards they demand of their leadership.
Steve/Gordy – “The way I see it, Steve was just asking Christians if they would be better off doing things Biblically” – it’s quite bizarre how you refer to yourself in the third person Steve/Gordy. Is it on the off-chance someone might come over here from MPBC (http://exposingerror.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/making-the-connection-moonee-ponds-baptist-church-and-hillsong/) and read your comments under your “Gordy” pseudonym?
‘[…] it’s quite bizarre how [Steve/Gordy] refer[s] to [himself] in the third person. Is it on the off-chance someone might come over here from MPBC”?’
Maybe Steve/Gordy refers to himself in the third person because he thinks he is triune – perhaps that steady diet of WoF theology he’s been on is getting to him, and he thinks that he’s a “little god” with a three-way twist.
That could explain why we have Steve the orthodox, Steve the supporter of all things heterodox, Steve the bully, Steve the apologetic, Steve the peacemaker, Steve the divisive, Steve who’s not going to comment any more, Steve who can’t help himself commenting, Steve who’s going to shut his own blog down, Steve who’s going to keep his blog alive, Steve who boasts of allowing unfettered commenting on his blog, Steve who has disabled commenting on his blog…
Hang on- that’s a lot more than three! Is Steve trying to out-do Benny Hinn’s “trinity of trinities”? Just how many of you are there, Steve?
Could it simply be that poor old Steve/Gordy suffers from PPPMPD (“Pathetic Pentecostal Pastor Multiple Pseudonym Disorder”)?
Either way, it looks like Mr Double-Minded won’t be receiving much from God – not that he’s ever been given anything useful in the past, mind you.
I am curious – what is the chapter and verse commanding Christians not to bring accusations against an “*elder* except by two or three witnesses”?
1. Elder: If Matthew 18 passage was being thought of – who is Jesus referring to? An elder, preacher, pastor, (or any other “title” for a leader) OR a brother (therefore equal”rank”) who has sinned against that individual?
2. several witnesses- a bit ambiguous there; needs clarification. Do they only count as witnesses if they actually saw/ heard what the “elder” said/did in person?
Therefore in your eyes does that mean no person – no matter much factual evidence, information from reliable sources et. al. is given to them – is permitted to expose a false teacher/ leader “because they were not at the scene of the crime”?
If that’s your reasoning style then I hope you’re never put on jury duty because apparently you don’t believe anyone has the right to judge a person….EVER!
gordy i saw that comment. you said i quote you:
“By the way, will you be asking why churchwatcher always writes in the third person? Maybe there’s more than one of them! We call them LEGION.”
gordy, “LEGION” was uncalled for. i am disappointed you could say that. is that your true colors??
“We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.” 1 jn 3:14
“If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?” 1 jn 4:20
honestly, on churchwatcher having a multiple user id, everyone knows he has multiple ppl helping run this site since he has agreed so. and also its in his ABOUT ME page. it clearly explains ‘WE.’ anyway its his blog doesnt he have the right to keep it simple if he wants to??
man gordy you get super nasty when ppl drop their guard. any godly sorrow for that?? scripture and verse.. for ugliness??
Gordy has been sin-binned again. It was interesting to see how he behaves on other blogs, very educational.
gordy asks for scripture and verse, then he takes extra liberties for himself and demonstrates that kind of behavior. i dont understand how he claims he is a pastor. what kind of church?? his the “LEGION” fit was a display of hatred. no excuse for it..
Passing By said:
As someone who worships in Moonee Ponds Baptist Church and knows about a lot of what has been happening here, I can tell you that the pastor of MPBC, Greg downright refused to meet with several of the church members. The minute Greg finds out that someone might have some theological differences or wants to question his usage of Church money, he immediately asks them to leave the church, instead of prayerfully considering if the differences are even worth discussing. So what Steve is stating here is a lie. Greg will resort to bullying, threatening and even name calling just to make members feel very uncomfortable and to chase them out of the church. The blog clearly mentions all that. The reason the authors of the blog had to stay anonymous is that Pastor Greg and the reduced church leadership of 3 deacons (used to be 9 deacons and 3 elders) sought legal advice and wanted to sue the blog author. While there can be a point made that the authors should be more courageous about their convictions, (and in time maybe they will) for the moment, they have decided to stay anonymous till more is revealed.
btw, thank you for this blog, it is very encouraging to find out that there are others who are making every effort to stay faithful to the Word of God.
Thanks for dropping by, Paul and you’re very welcome to stay. However it appears the flame has been lit under Steve/Gordy yet again.
Exposing his identity, exposing his hypocrisy (or should we say his “claim to having higher standards or more noble beliefs than others”), over on http://exposingerror.wordpress.com/ has awakened the beast. Don’t be surprised if you find him using another IP address and/or another name to continue his need to instruct you how to conduct yourself on your blog. Or you may find he will decide to write his own blog in response to you as he continues to do with C3 Church Watch and Hillsong Church Watch (see below).
It’s a bit like the opening narrative of an episode of the Twilight Zone: “The Obsolete Man”:
“You walk into this room at your own risk, because it leads to the future, not a future that will be but one that might be. This is not a new world, it is simply an extension of what began in the old one. It has patterned itself after every dictator who has ever planted the ripping imprint of a boot on the pages of history since the beginning of time. It has refinements, technological advances, and a more sophisticated approach to the destruction of human freedom. But like every one of the super-states that preceded it, it has one iron rule: logic is an enemy and truth is a menace.”
that is very kind of you to stop by and explain these things to us, thank you..
Oh dear! It seems that Steve/Gordy/Faithlift has gotten worse over time – sometimes he’s talking to himself and at other times, talking about himself, but at the end of the day (when you’ve huffed and puffed enough to blow away the latest smokescreen of twisted scripture and avoidance of the real issues) it’s still all about him and his self righteous justification of his own sins…
Now, about the current blog:
“What is the answer to hunger? Money! But you may say “what about food?” But you need money to buy it.”
quoted from Brian Houston, above
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God”
quoted from Jesus Christ – Matthew 4:4
Obviously Brian hasn’t been reading his Bible much lately, has he? Perhaps the reason that *you* need more money, is because *Brian* needs more money too – 10% of YOUR money??? Probably…
And just to be off topic for 10 seconds – I’m posting a link from Mike Oppenheimer about the real E.W. Kenyon, not the one Steve manufactured on his own sad little blogsite, just to put a line under all of that nonsense…
Azaiah q. said:
@Gordy, Still gorging yourself on this forbidden fruit are you?
Still dabbling in the Houston, Pringle & Friends’ one-world-church-to-be?
“I am also interested in the way narratives evolve in the course of time as they run out of subjects by which to level accusations.”
There will never be an end of subjects for C3CW articles, as long as your favorite 2 cult leaders & others continue to masquerade as Christians.
@Thinker – Matthew 18 is the real furphy, used in many places by unscrupulous church leaders to silence dissent and to gag the mouths of discerning congregants.
It was taught by Jesus Christ himself as a remedy for addressing personal sin between brethren – a private matter between two individuals only. That’s how it should start and how it should finish if the brethren involved are mature Christians – a challenge issued by the offended party, followed by repentance on the part of the offending party – end of story. Matthew 18 was never intended to become a “court case” within the confines of the church – ever.
Should the matter proceed to stage 2 (due to a lack of a resolution) then the ‘witnesses’ are to be mature, reliable brethren, who can help the two parties in disagreement to see reason from a Biblical viewpoint, and come to a resolution. They are NOT witnesses for the ‘prosecution’ (offended party,) but are to act as true and impartial mediators in the dispute, who can give a factual account of what the dispute/complaint is all about, should the matter come to the notice of the church in stage 3.
This is the other one that people like to quote/misquote:
“Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality. ” (1 Tim 5:19. 20, 21)
This is a Bible principle used throughout the OT and NT in order to avoid favouritism or harsh and unfair dealings, so that balance is maintained and ‘righteous judgement’ may be enacted.
Even if a person is found to be sinning against God and/or the congregation, they can be restored through simple repentance. However, if this and other principles of the scripture in terms of church discipline, (such as Matthew 18) are refused to be acted on, or worse still, misused in order to cover up sin (including the private/public sins of leaders,) then a serious breach of doctrine and practice will have occurred.
If you can’t make any headway with an erring leadership, it is either time for them to be rebuked and/or removed, or time for you to move on, depending on the leading of the Lord in such matters. God is not the author of confusion or error , but a God of peace, so if you are to have peace in your church fellowship, then these matters must be clearly understood by one and all, and reinforced by faithful ministers of the Word.
Auztin thanks for pointing out the 1 Timothy 5:19-21 verses. Surely everyone would agree that accusations against any leader/s should be investigated thoroughly. “Innocent until found guilty” etc. It is a matter of balance. Unfortunately these verses seem to be commonly misused by abusive leaders to intimidate concerned people into keeping quiet about issues that need to be addressed for that church’s spiritual health.
Compare Jesus of description of hireling versus shepherd. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+10%3A1-18&version=KJV
Those of us whose pastors are open to criticism (if ever needed) should be praising God and praying for them to maintain that openness and willingness to remain accountable to their flock.
Those whose pastors fit Jesus’ descriptions of hirelings (especially verses 10, 12-13) should prayerfully consider whether they should confront them, how that should be done etc. If the issue is not resolved – e.g. leader/s resort to word games, manipulation, social ostracism and perhaps even legal threats – they and their family should consider leaving that church and finding a bible-believing church instead.
Hello Thinker – yes, you’re right about all of that, that’s why Jesus taught us about “judging with righteous judgement” – to fully investigate a person/leader, doctrine or matter, judiciously, with all of the facts and relevant scriptures on the table for consideration, before you give a conclusion:
“Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”
(Jesus Christ quoted in John 7:24)
But in keeping with the theme of this current blog “You Need More Money” – anyone who puts that idea forward as a cardinal point of the the faith is not at all concerned with genuine church growth or New Testament leadership models, are they?
They just want the congregation to “show me the money” and then go off and lead lavish lifestyles in opulence and not care about the true status of the sheep under their woeful “care”… Perhaps Hillsong would be better off installing revolving doors???
Churches invariably start with one or two leading brethren, and if that church turns out to be a healthy one, then more men of integrity, who are solid in doctrine and the faith will be added to that leadership team over time, and that church will grow and prosper (true prosperity,) over time.
However, if the “faith” taught by that church is ‘toxic’ and the leaders turn out to be “hirelings” (or tyrants,) with a few ‘yes men’ masquerading as elders/deacons, then that church has not grown in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ at all – it may have ‘grown fat’ but it certainly hasn’t ‘grown up’!
This is what often leads to the “Diotrephes factor” (3 John 1:9) – immature leaders, who gain control over a congregation by ungodly methods, but who remain unchecked in their carnal pursuits for fame and fortune…
Growing a church the ‘Hillsong way’? What utter rubbish – you’d have to sell your soul to even begin that process… and of course, you’d “need more money” too!
Churchwatcher – here’s another video clip, which reminds me of Steve/Gordy/Faithlift – played out by Jack Nicholson and Tom Cruise in the movie “A few Good Men” – from the lines:
“You can’t handle the truth…” to the lines :
“you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall!”
Of course we need you on that wall Steve,… of course we do…:
Just one more thing Churchwatcher – Steve/Gordy/Faithlift/whatever – has been banned from the MPBC blog site too:
So now you can add that one to the list of blogs that he has been banned from, with integrity and impunity – it’s official!!!
Geoff Trescott said:
Hillsong, with its crass commercialism preys on middle-class and aspiring middle-class people who seek the ‘respectability’ of religion in this institution (compared to the traditional churches where there is often more life in the church graveyard than there is inside, not to mention the moribund congregation). Hillsong is ‘feel-good’ and ‘sexed-up’. Look at the expensive suits the Pastors wear – look at the cars they drive. Look at the cars the congregation drives. They’re prosperity/success incarnate. The ‘rock-concert’ format, the noise, the lights, the
repetitive haranguing mantras from the stage (no pulpits there), it’s a sensual experience -feel good with God thrown in. Similar to the standard line of a well-known burger chain, “Would you like God with that?”
Whatever Hillsongs adherents are seeking there, they won’t find it in that ‘Bacchanalian’ orgy of the senses where the user pays! We all know it’s more blessed to give than to receive, don’t we? It ought to be called ‘The Church of the Latter Day Charlatans’.
Pingback: A Baptist Pastor goes to a Hillsong Conference! | Exposing Error @ Moonee Ponds Baptist Church