Going by attacks on prosperous pastors on public domains and social media, I have come to ask the question, “To Have a Poor Pastor Or Rich. Which Is Better?”
Add 1 to 1, subtract 1 from 1, count the odds, and mark the event, it is better to be rich than to be poor – Mike Ihezuo.
Why this fuse over prosperous, rich pastors? Is it better for you, I mean you, to have a poor pastor or a rich one? Is it better to have a prospering, succeeding pastor than to have a failing one? Is it better to have a pastor/church that can take 6years to raise an evangelism bus or rent a house or have a pastor/church that can take one second to do so?
I know of one church many years ago I visited there, on their wall is a list of contributors for the purchase of their ministry [missionary] bus. It was going 3 years, but not yet completed. 
At the commission of a major cathedral [name withheld] in my state capital, my father told me that when they were youths in the 1930s, his father and later contributed to the building of that cathedral church. Now the church was commissioned in the early 80s. My church cathedral, we built it in two to three years. Now, which is better – the cathedral of the 1930s-1980s and the one we built in 3 years in 2010+?
In my church with all humility, we don’t take ministry bus offerings two times. It is provided for, sometimes anonymous. Which is better?
In that church I went to, for ministry, I saw a lack. That couldn’t be God’s plan or make. It is manmade. Who made it? Leadership…starting with the pastor. 
I know also of a church pastor that told me that their member was pierced by a nail or sharp object and the hospital asked them to bring N21,000.00 for ATI [Anti Tetanus Injection] and for 24hrs to 48hours, they have not been able to raise such “chikini” money after contacting all members, friends, and well-wishers. By the way, do members need to know of “chikini” N21,000? No. Why did they know now? Leadership failure…
Job in the Bible was one of the richest of all bible men. He was a man of God.
King David was rich, honorable, and prosperous. He was an ancestor to Jesus.
King Solomon extended the bounds of prosperity and wealth and became the wisest/richest king of all time. Queen Sheba of Ethiopia attested to it.
Obed was a rich ancestor to Jesus.
Moses was prosperous and well prepared intellectually, and materially to be the next pharaoh before God asked him to switch allegiance. 
Mention it. Where it appears the wealth is not mentioned, it was a deliberate choice, not a handicap.
Jesus worked with big dudes of his time in promoting the gospel. All the apostles were rich, at least comfortable, and never poor – none. [Do you know what it means to follow Jesus day and night for 3½ and your business was taken care of by you, your family, and their needs by paid employees?]
Peter on a fateful day fed Jesus’ entourage (over 120 big men) sumptuously by the day Jesus visited on emergence [because Peter’s mother-in-law was sick], where Peter’s mother-in-law ministered to them. The poor man can’t minister to 120 adult men sumptuously unprepared and unannounced, yet Peter did and was not going to work daily but following Jesus – that means he had a company, a firm doing fishing business.
Similar to all others.
John and James couldn’t have been discussed to be on the throne, one on left, one on right, if from a poor background. Their mother came. That means their background isn’t poor.
Luke was a physician [medical doctor – comfortable],
Mathew was a finance expert.
In a church, one member was complaining that God needed to provide him with N500,000 to complete a supply contract. The next person next to him overheard him and asked him his account number. Immediately, the latter transferred from his phone N500,000 to the complainant. Which is better? – the inability of the entire church and who the church knows to provide N21,000 to prevent a sister from dying of tetanus or a member, not the entire church raising N500,000 free to another?
I think even if one is a devil, one will prefer the latter. Then why do you prefer a poor, voiceless, non-prosperous pastor or church to a rich, voiceful, and prosperous pastor or church?
I guess I know the answers.
One, the answer is HATRED.
People hide under hatred on account of their weakness/failure. Instead of attacking the root cause of failure/weakness, they attack those who attained the feat they could not.
Can I shock you? Then sit up!
Abraham the friend of God, himself was the richest man, east of Mesopotamia i.e., the east in his time. All his generation were notedly stupendously rich and each worked out his blessing [teaching us another principle, but for another day, not now and here]. Their prosperity was envied by others.
Two, the next answer is FAULTY BELIEF.
Some infamously believe the Christian faith is better practiced as beggars. They prefer people serving God to be paupers. That originated from wrong belief because of wrong quoting that money is the root of all evil. That wasn’t scripture, but the love of money is the root of all evil. [They (the above bold-italicized) are not the same.]. The difference between ‘money is…’ and ‘love of money is…’ is a world apart, as far as heaven is far from earth.
These two points should be enough for now. I think I rather associate with the successful than the unsuccessful, the rich than the poor, the voiceful than the voiceless, the impacting than the impact-less, the haves than the lacks. The world is controlled by the former and not the latter. Ask poor nations what they suffer in the comity of nations.
For me, I hammer it on the rooftop, add 1 to 1, subtract 1 from 1, count the odds, and mark the event, it is better to be rich than to be poor. I don’t know about you.
What do you think? Your comments, please.
