Is it possible that some of us, having rightly rejected the prosperity gospel, have subtly succumbed to another insidious belief? I call it the scarcity gospel—the assumption that we should expect God to do little through our churches or in our lifetime. We don’t expect to see people come to faith in surprising numbers through our churches. We don’t expect to see a surprising work of God’s Spirit sweep through our churches and strengthen the faith of congregants. We don’t expect to see the gospel advance in places and among people where the church is underrepresented. We expect little. 

I have watched the prosperity gospel grow in popularity during my lifetime. It used to be preached primarily in small Pentecostal churches scattered around the country. Now it’s the central message in some of America’s largest churches. It fills arenas and is the subject of bestselling books. It’s become so prevalent that its eccentricities are a key part of Righteous Gemstones, an HBO series.
I have traveled the world and have seen firsthand the devastating effects of the prosperity gospel in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. It promises material wealth and physical health to those who trust in God. It implies—often insists—that a lack of wealth and health is tied to a lack of faith.
The greatest tragedy is that Christ is not central. His sacrificial atonement is replaced with our sacrificial giving. His glorious resurrection is replaced with aspirations of our glorious “success.” The prosperity gospel is indeed heresy.
And yet, I think some Christians reading this article might be missing a bigger danger closer to home.
The Scarcity Gospel
Is it possible that some of us, having rightly rejected the prosperity gospel, have subtly succumbed to another insidious belief? I call it the scarcity gospel—the assumption that we should expect God to do little through our churches or in our lifetime.
We don’t expect to see people come to faith in surprising numbers through our churches. We don’t expect to see a surprising work of God’s Spirit sweep through our churches and strengthen the faith of congregants. We don’t expect to see the gospel advance in places and among people where the church is underrepresented. We expect little. And that may be what we actually experience during our lifetime (James 4:2b).
We aren’t promised the church will advance or progress exponentially. Yet we should expect God to do more than we can ask or think (Eph. 3:20), while entrusting him with the final result.
Read More

Great sinners need a great Savior. That is exactly what Christ is, for He is “able also to save them to the uttermost” (Heb. 7:25)! That is life-changing news for the “chief of sinners.” If Christ can save Paul, who was a blasphemer, a persecutor, and injurer of innocents, He can also save you, no matter how hell-worthy you may be. Ask Jesus Christ for the grace of repentance and faith that you may put all your trust in Him (cf. Acts 5:31).

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. — 1 TIMOTHY 1:15
For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. — HEBREWS 9:26; CF. 1 JOHN 1:9; 3:5
In Christ’s first coming, He implemented a rescue plan conceived in the mind of God before the foundation of the world. He did not come to promote holiday cheer, boost end-of-year sales, or serve as the central figure in a nativity scene. He came to save sinners.
To save sinners, Christ had to put away what makes people sinners— namely, sin. At the dawn of man’s history, sin, like an unwelcome virus, infected mankind easily enough. But how could it be exterminated? God was already answering this question through the Old Testament sacrificial system. One of the main themes in the epistle to the Hebrews is the repetitious labors of Old Testament priests: “And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death” (Heb. 7:23). Morning and evening, priests placed burnt offerings for sin on an altar, the fire of which was never to go out (2 Chron. 13:11; Lev. 6:12).
Nonetheless, sins were not fully extinguished through this system (Heb. 10:4). Old Testament sacrifices were merely a shadow, or copy, of what was to come (Heb. 9:23); thus, the priesthood of Aaron could have sacrificed burnt offerings for a million years without putting away a single sin. The writer of Hebrews says the seed of Adam needed a better priesthood to put away sins—a priesthood “after the order of Melchisedec” (Heb. 7:17; cf. Ps. 110:4). Likewise, a better sacrifice offered in a better tabernacle was necessary. When a truly perfect sacrifice was offered in the tabernacle of heaven, sin would finally be put away.
Read More
Related Posts:

Synod, the last two years especially, feels like war. The differing visions for the CRC’s future and the underlying theologies behind the opposing visions collide each year at synod. The conflict does not feel like a friendly game of basketball between family members. The conflict feels like a desperate fight for the soul of the church. The viewpoints are so different that despite the verboten descriptors, there will be winners and losers. The losers will find themselves in a CRC so intolerable that they will have to leave. At synod, the gloves come off because the future of the church is at stake.

Anyone who watched the final day of Synod 2023 in the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) would have been stunned. The log jam of recommendations still to reach the floor led to the decision to postpone the remaining business to 2024. Highly important but contentious topics remained until the following year.
The differing factions within the CRC are increasingly visible at synod. “Conservative” and “liberal” descriptors are so politically charged that matters of Christ’s church become conflated with current political interests. A better term for the conservative faction is confessionalist. Exemplified by “The Abide Project,” these stress confessional identity and hold orthodox views on marriage and sexuality. The liberals would better be called revisionists. “All One Body” would fit into this group. They are more open to revising traditional church stances and new movements of what the Holy Spirit might be doing. They are either in favor of full LGBTQ inclusion or are open to the idea. Then there are moderates who often feel caught in the middle. Their organization is the CRCNA agencies and offices. They tend to be loyal to the CRC brand and averse to ecclesiastical conflict.
Synod 2022
The most contentious matters of Synod 2023 concerned matters from last year. Synod 2022 was a significant blow to the affirming (revisionist?) movement within the CRC. Synod had overwhelmingly voted to “affirm that ‘unchastity’ in Heidelberg Catechism Q&A 108 encompasses adultery, premarital sex, extramarital sex, polyamory, pornography and homosexual sex, all of which violate the seventh commandment. In so doing, synod declares this affirmation ‘an interpretation of [a] confession’ (Acts of Synod 1975, p. 603). Therefore, this interpretation has confessional status.”
Synod 2022 also was firm with Neland Ave CRC in Grand Rapids. In 2020, this congregation ordained a deacon living in a same-sex marriage. Synod overwhelmingly voted to “instruct Neland Ave to immediately rescind its decision to ordain a deacon in a same-sex marriage, thus nullifying this deacon’s term.” Further, synod instructed Neland Ave “to uphold our shared denominational covenants” and tasked the Executive Director to appoint a committee in loco to follow up with Neland Ave and Classis Grand Rapids East, which had refused to intervene. Neland Ave decided to appeal the decision to Synod 2023. Classis Grand Rapids East used the appeal as reason to still not intervene.
Better Together?
Once Synod 2022 drew a hard line on sexuality, the CRC head office became flooded with calls about current officebearers who disagreed with the decision, which led to the release of a FAQ.In February of 2023, a new group emerged, calling themselves “Better Together: A Third Way.” Characterizing the revisionist-confessional debate as another branch of the broader culture wars erupting in the CRC, Better Together wants the CRC to have a “mission-focused, baptismally-based identity that allows for disagreement on ethical issues that do not determine our salvation, such as same-sex marriage…” This is “for the purpose of unity and mission together.” Essentially, the Third Way is unity at all costs. For one side this would be the cost of safe spaces for LGBTQ people. For the other side this would be the cost of having teachers in the CRC using the grace of God as license for immorality.Only days after Better Together appeared, the CRC’s LGBTQ lobby group announced that 11 congregations have made public statements in support of full LGBTQ inclusion.Overtures began to pile up. Many of them asked to reverse the decisions of the prior synod. Particular focus was on reversing the declaration that synod’s definition of “unchastity” has “confessional status.” Some called for responses to Neland Ave and the other 10 congregations with affirming statements. Others asked for leeway for Neland Ave and other affirming congregations as well as officebearers who disagree with Synod 2022’s decision.
Synod 2023
When Synod 2023 finally commenced, the initial days progressed as synods often go.Synod 2023 decided (again) to refuse an overture to adopt Belhar Confession as a full confession. The final speaker before the vote was Christian Sebastia, a pastor originally from Venezuela who condemned the Belhar’s “liberation theology” that would open the door to “blood-red socialism.”Synod decided to make an official statement against assisted suicide. Even speakers from historically revisionist classes spoke against assisted suicide and the need for a statement. A task force will be appointed to draft a report on assisted suicide based on prior synodical statements valuing human life.A proposed “Code of Conduct for Ministry Leaders” with vague language about “harm” was thoroughly revised so that any open-ended language could not be used to limit the teaching of Scripture. After all, God’s Word is sharper than any two-edged sword (Hebrews 4:12). Synod explicitly clarified that this Code is “subservient to Scripture and our Confessions.” Moreover, the Code is “encouraged” (not required) of councils to use for church staff.
All One Body demonstrators daily lined the walkways to and from the dining hall singing “Jesus Loves Me” and “They’ll Know We Are Christians By Our Love” as delegates walked by. The group neared 130 on Wednesday, many holding signs such as, “Avoid Loveless Orthodoxy / Accept God is Love,” “Say ‘All Are Welcome’ … and MEAN IT!”While All One Body whites (is there a better descriptor?) demonstrated outside, inside was a different story. “Several Korean and Latino delegates expressed their positions on human sexuality,” observed Latino Commissioned Pastor Moises Pacheco. “And it seemed to be totally ignored by the delegates speaking in favor of the affirming side even while they continued to claim a desire to advocate for those on the margins. Oddly enough, those on the margins that they were advocating for seemed to be their own friends and family. I’m not sure I have ever felt so ignored.
Read More
Related Posts: