Churches operating on money is wrong

[Sine Nomine]

The issue you are speaking about isn't really an issue that is faced by a large church.
But rather its the situation faced by a TV Ministry that is huge.
Once you are on 3 networks, and into 40 million homes, you have to pay for it.......millions a month.
And once you are in that situation, once you are a "famous TV Preacher", then you are stuck trying not to lose this POSITION, and that is where the corruption, where the flesh, gets the upper hand.
These people have convinced many that "ITS BIG because GOD is in it".......as if its some proof of their anointing.
This means that if they dont keep the Ministry as huge as it was last year......
All of that is a trap.
Many of them are trapped.

Many "famous TV preachers" are trapped? No. They feel trapped because they won't be able to maintain their lifestyle and power unless they convince people to support them. This is not Christianity.

 

[lsume]

My view of modern churches is, that they have an $X monthly minimum budget to operate. In USA it can be thousands of dollars, in Kazakhstan - hundreds. Still, they need money-money-money (which makes the world go round). If they do not receive $X or more every month, they're in big trouble, they can get into debt and then go bankrupt. Constant need of money. They can't really earn money today like in the old days, when churches owned land, peasants, manufacturing facilities etc. Today, they're mostly stripped of those feudalist or capitalist privileges and can only collect donations. Churches on odd occasions rent out their premises, but that's not their main business and doesn't cover $X.

I see it as a big problem. Because church as organization isn't forced by serving Jesus anymore, but by this constant "Damoclis gladius" hanging over their heads... Constantly finding $X this way or another to survive, turning them into a parasite of society... It's very bad, I think. Very bad. Very corrupting.

What do you think?

 

[lsume]

I believe that The Bible says not to muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn applies to the full time workers sharing The Good News. However, the prosperity gospel is not one that I agree with. There is a vast difference between feeding clothing and sheltering God's workers and living in extreme luxury. God is The Judge.

1Cor.9

1. [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

1Tim.5

1. [18] For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

 

[SkyWriting]

Church is being defined in an incorrect way. These days when you say the word Church, more than likely the person is going to visualize " the building ". Even these counterfeit churches who outwardly admit that church is NOT a building....still function as if church can't be church...WITHOUT the building. This is how the church is supposed to operate in regards to MONEY..

Acts 2:45 - And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need.

See the MONEY...went to the Church..aka...THE PEOPLE...aka...the SAVED. That's..the Church. Jesus is coming back for His CHURCH....not a temple built by human hands.

I'm not sure that proceeds to "all" means only the saved, the church, the people.

 

[NeedyFollower]

I believe that The Bible says not to muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn applies to the full time workers sharing The Good News. However, the prosperity gospel is not one that I agree with. There is a vast difference between feeding clothing and sheltering God's workers and living in extreme luxury. God is The Judge.

1Cor.9

1. [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

1Tim.5

1. [18] For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

I agree. I met a pastor in Guatemala who I believe was truly a pastor. I believed he worked but also ministered to a congregation. ( He lived in a one room stick house with a dirt floor ) He was not putting kids through college. He was not saving for retirement . He did not sponsor car washes ( no one had cars ) nor bake sales so the kids could to a summer vacation bible camp. He did receive two chickens per week " In pay". I believe the root cause of the question at hand , i.e. The Money Churches , is the fact that we have no vision of who we are .

The paid "pastors-evangelist-administrators-teachers-visitors of the sick-giving the sacraments , etc. " is not a biblical based role . It is a modern invention and takes two parents working to support this corrupted model. No one is at home to actually raise the children so we give our children to the world to raise and to learn to pursue this world which we believe is fine as long as they are also in church and giving 10% to continue the "machine" that it has become .

We send our children to schools and then college for what purpose ? So they will have more time for prayer ? So they will be transformed into the image of Christ ? If they are a child of God through regeneration by the Blood of Christ , what more can they aspire to be . Christ made himself of no reputation. Peter was illiterate. Were they failures ? By the world's standards , yes . But this world passes away.

 

[SkyWriting]

Don’t take your kids to a megachurch, where the only value they see in worship is the production value.
Don’t take your kids to a megachurch, where the preacher and “worship leader” are rock stars.

Or any church at all for that matter.

 

[ChristianFromKazakhstan]

Along this line of discussion, do you believe a church should tell its members what the staff their makes?

I go to a church that has a $15 million budget, 51% of said budget goes toward salaries, but they will not divulge what the individual pastors make per yer...

I think so

 

[ChristianFromKazakhstan]

It seems you have a real problem with the church (from this and other posts). I don't understand that.



1 John 3:14-15 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. Whoever does not love abides in death. (15) Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.

Church as believers - I love her.

Church as a human counterfeit system built on money - is not from Jesus.

 

[A_Thinker]

You can do it personally. Directly. No need to delegate a hireling in your place. It's a crippled round-about way.

Paul called upon us to (materially) support those in ministry ...

1 Corinthians 9

3 Some people want to judge me. So this is the answer I give them: 4 We have the right to eat and drink, don’t we? 5 We have the right to bring a believing wife with us when we travel, don’t we? The other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Peter all do this. 6 And are Barnabas and I the only ones who must work to earn our living? 7 No soldier ever serves in the army and pays his own salary. No one ever plants a vineyard without eating some of the grapes himself. No one takes care of a flock of sheep without drinking some of the milk himself.

8 These aren’t just my own thoughts. God’s law says the same thing.9 Yes, it is written in the Law of Moses: “When a work animal is being used to separate grain, don’t keep it from eating the grain.” When God said this, was he thinking only about work animals? No. 10 He was really talking about us. Yes, that was written for us. The one who plows and the one who separates the grain should both expect to get some of the grain for their work. 11 We planted spiritual seed among you, so we should be able to harvest from you some things for this life. Surely that is not asking too much. 12 Others have this right to get things from you. So surely we have this right too. But we don’t use this right. No, we endure everything ourselves so that we will not stop anyone from obeying the Good News of Christ. 13 Surely you know that those who work at the Temple get their food from the Temple. And those who serve at the altar get part of what is offered at the altar. 14 It is the same with those who have the work of telling the Good News. The Lord has commanded that those who tell the Good News should get their living from this work.

 

[A_Thinker]

Church as believers - I love her.

Church as a human counterfeit system built on money - is not from Jesus.

Churches should never have MAKING MONEY as their PRIMARY goal.

But, churches (i.e. groups of Christ-followers) may USE MONEY (or other resources) to support christian ministry.

Consider what most churches maintain on a consistent basis. They provide a gathering-place for local groups of Christ-followers, they provide Biblical teaching to these Christ-followers, they provide encouragement, counseling, fellowship, leadership, corporate christian activity, etc.

If the faithful did not support these efforts with money, ... they would have to find other (material) ways to support it.

Recall that God commanded that the Hebrew community support their religious activity and participants (the Levites).

It's just the PRACTICAL side of ministry ...

 

[ChristianFromKazakhstan]

Paul called upon us to (materially) support those in ministry ...

1 Corinthians 9

3 Some people want to judge me. So this is the answer I give them: 4 We have the right to eat and drink, don’t we? 5 We have the right to bring a believing wife with us when we travel, don’t we? The other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Peter all do this. 6 And are Barnabas and I the only ones who must work to earn our living? 7 No soldier ever serves in the army and pays his own salary. No one ever plants a vineyard without eating some of the grapes himself. No one takes care of a flock of sheep without drinking some of the milk himself.

8 These aren’t just my own thoughts. God’s law says the same thing.9 Yes, it is written in the Law of Moses: “When a work animal is being used to separate grain, don’t keep it from eating the grain.” When God said this, was he thinking only about work animals? No. 10 He was really talking about us. Yes, that was written for us. The one who plows and the one who separates the grain should both expect to get some of the grain for their work. 11 We planted spiritual seed among you, so we should be able to harvest from you some things for this life. Surely that is not asking too much. 12 Others have this right to get things from you. So surely we have this right too. But we don’t use this right. No, we endure everything ourselves so that we will not stop anyone from obeying the Good News of Christ. 13 Surely you know that those who work at the Temple get their food from the Temple. And those who serve at the altar get part of what is offered at the altar. 14 It is the same with those who have the work of telling the Good News. The Lord has commanded that those who tell the Good News should get their living from this work.

Yes. But if you noticed, Paul says he chose not to use this right for sake of Jesus. We shouldn't also.

 

[ChristianFromKazakhstan]

Churches should never have MAKING MONEY as their PRIMARY goal.

But, churches (i.e. groups of Christ-followers) may USE MONEY (or other resources) to support christian ministry.

Consider what most churches maintain on a consistent basis. They provide a gathering-place for local groups of Christ-followers, they provide Biblical teaching to these Christ-followers, they provide encouragement, counseling, fellowship, leadership, corporate christian activity, etc.

If the faithful did not support these efforts with money, ... they would have to find other (material) ways to support it.

Recall that God commanded that the Hebrew community support their religious activity and participants (the Levites).

It's just the PRACTICAL side of ministry ...

Yes. Money use is inevitable. But there should be model of church where you give heart to heart directly. You don't hire hireling to serve instead of you. Use your money to serve Jesus directly. Don't delegate corrupt hirelings.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

My view of modern churches is, that they have an $X monthly minimum budget to operate. In USA it can be thousands of dollars, in Kazakhstan - hundreds. Still, they need money-money-money (which makes the world go round). If they do not receive $X or more every month, they're in big trouble, they can get into debt and then go bankrupt. Constant need of money. They can't really earn money today like in the old days, when churches owned land, peasants, manufacturing facilities etc. Today, they're mostly stripped of those feudalist or capitalist privileges and can only collect donations. Churches on odd occasions rent out their premises, but that's not their main business and doesn't cover $X.

I see it as a big problem. Because church as organization isn't forced by serving Jesus anymore, but by this constant "Damoclis gladius" hanging over their heads... Constantly finding $X this way or another to survive, turning them into a parasite of society... It's very bad, I think. Very bad. Very corrupting.

What do you think?

I agree as soon as the motivation is raising money under the guise of spreading the gospel as if the gospel requires money breeds corruption. Mammon becomes the head and it is obvious here in the US. For example if there is people in a church that are in obvious sin but are "generous givers" or "heavy tithers" the pastor turns a blind eye often. The pastors message becomes compromised and he will no longer preach on subjects that will offend people that will cause them to walk out the door and with them their money. I have seen this time and time again. Then you have the salaried pastor who derives 100% of his income from the church. Because the salaried pastor is now reliant on people giving his message becomes slanted and more corrupt over time being money centered no matter how he tries to wrap it. This is why Paul said over and over he worked for himself and was not a burden on the people and that he did that NOT to hinder the gospel in anyway.

 

[A_Thinker]

You don't need a church for that. A good society could easily solve these kinds of issues once and for all. If only there were more true Christians doing the work of Jesus in the way that Jesus wants. Not warming pews on Sundays only. It's idleness, only a small fraction of what can really be achieved.

Society needs Jesus first of all, not just food, clothes etc. It's a temporary solution that jumps back up tomorrow even more. People need unending source of living water, not tasty bread and fish that they'll want the next day again.

These churches, charitable organizations, etc. aren't efficient. Their operational and adminustrative costs are too high. If each individual helps heart-to-heart directly, the cumulative effect is several times better.

Church must exist free of charge. Nothing for money. No work to be done for a fee, for a salary. No cent of money involved.

The task of the church is spiritual, not physical.

Churches are, in principal, ... "Good societies" ...

Paul collected offerings from the New Testament churches to support his (and others') ministries.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Yes. But if you noticed, Paul says he chose not to use this right for sake of Jesus. We shouldn't also.

It is interesting in 1 corinthians 9 Paul is referrencing food, a vineyard produces food, cattle milk. That is food and drink not money. Paul did not say give me money did he but somehow this is such a stronghold in peoples mind. Why? Because it has been beaten into us that this is money. Paul even quotes Jesus from Luke 6 in 1 Timothy to Timothy, do not muzzle the ox. What does the muzzle stop the ox from doing? Eating...last time I checked oxen do not use money.

 

[PollyJetix]

Church as believers - I love her.

Church as a human counterfeit system built on money - is not from Jesus.

And yet, Paul said in the New Testament in relation to "the elders that rule well",

1 Timothy 5:17-18

"Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward."

Therefore, there was an obligation on the part of those who are NOT "elders who rule", to supply "honour" to give to those elders, which was to be the same as the "corn" allowed to the oxen who did the threshing, and the "reward" (translated in the OT as "hire") given to the laborer.

Barnabas and Paul were given the right not to hold a job, because they were given a salaried position:

1 Corinthians 9:

6 "Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?"

Therefore, if we receive spiritual things from a minister of the gospel, we owe wages to him, in carnal things.

Paul also said that he did a wrong to the Corinthian church, in not allowing them to support him financially.
2 Corinthians 12:13

"For what is it wherein ye were inferior to other churches, except it be that I myself was not burdensome to you? forgive me this wrong."

Look! This actually made the Corinthian church inferior to other churches!
Why? Because it's a principle of sowing and reaping.

Financially supporting the ministry is an obligation of the church, in the sight of God.
God wants those who are fed spiritually, to express their valuation of that spiritual food, by giving back financially.
If we refuse to do so, we are saying our money is worth more than the spiritual food, care, and guidance.

And those who don't give back, become spiritually inferior.
It's a process that happens on a spiritual level.

Paul said to Timothy:
2 Timothy 2:

1 Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.
2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
3 Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.
4 No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.
5 And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.
6 The husbandman that laboureth must be first partaker of the fruits.
7 Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.

How do all these verses tie together?
Paul was telling Timothy that he had a job to do. This job took time and effort. And that meant a difficult lifestyle.
Why? Because it required him to give up earthly entanglements... entanglements in trying to reap the fruits of earthly labor.
Timothy could have gone out and gotten a job to support himself.
But that would have taken time, energy and focus away from his first calling. The ministry.
It would have been an "entanglement."
And it would have been "unlawful".
Because it would have gone against the guidelines of "the husbandman that laboreth must be first partaker of the fruits."

You see, I grew up in the Mennonites. And to the outsider, it looks like these people have finally gotten it right:
The ministry is always chosen by lot from within the families within the local church. They actually do a version of drawing straws, to determine who will fill the pulpit for the rest of their lives. And whoever is chosen, is consiered to be chosen by God.
The churches I come from (the very conservative branch) require their ministers to support themselves financially. They do not pay a salary. However, they will occasionally give a free-will offering to individual ministers.

What I have observed, is that this type of ministry is very damaging to the church. The ministers are run ragged, trying to visit the sick, counsel the struggling, study to give quality spiritual food in sermons, etc. It's a full-time job they have to do on the side. And it can't all get done.

The word says the husbandman that laboreth must be FIRST partaker of the fruits.
The church owes him a salary.

Now, in the OT, the tithe was to be paid, to support the priesthood and the Temple.
In the New Testament, we protestants like to focus on the idea that we are all priests, and there is no "temple" made with hands where God dwells... our bodies are the temple of the Living God.

Yet, if the church owns no building, she will have to rent one. And rent, over time, costs more than ownership.
(Which is why landlords exist.) And if she does not pay her ministers, she expresses wordlessly just how much she values such labor.

In fact, in the "housechurches" I have observed from the inside, over the period of a few years, I have seen that those who believe in eliminating "elders who rule"... end up floundering terribly. They have no leadership, and act much like a body with no head... like a decapitated chicken, flopping all over the place... lots of activity for a while... but it quiets down soon, and dies out.

The New Testament is very clear. The tithe that was given in the Old Testament was given to support the priesthood.
In the NT, we are supposed to have ministers in leadership, same as the priests in the OT were to lead spiritually.
If the tithe were the minimum in the OT, we ought to consider that at least the bottom line for "voluntary giving" in the NT.

That is, if we value spiritual things as much as we say we do.

 

[PollyJetix]

Yes. But if you noticed, Paul says he chose not to use this right for sake of Jesus. We shouldn't also.

Paul said it was wrong of him to do that.
2 Corinthians 12:13 "For what is it wherein ye were inferior to other churches, except it be that I myself was not burdensome to you? forgive me this wrong."

 

[2Timothy2:15]

I believe that The Bible says not to muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn applies to the full time workers sharing The Good News. However, the prosperity gospel is not one that I agree with. There is a vast difference between feeding clothing and sheltering God's workers and living in extreme luxury. God is The Judge.

1Cor.9

1. [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?

1Tim.5

1. [18] For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

Paul is quoting Jesus in 1 Timothy.

Luke 10

4Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes: and salute no man by the way. 5And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to this house. 6And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon it: if not, it shall turn to you again. 7And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house. 8And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you, eat such things as are set before you: 9

Jesus set the presidence. It is FOOD not money that a labourer is worthy of. It is there plainly but for some mysterious reason you will not hear a sermon on that from these salaried pastors will you.

 

[Mountainmike]

In extreme examples, like JW almost the entire focus is on recruiting members and forcing current ones to buy the materials to convert others, It is close to an MLM scheme!

Mass in the catholic church is free...

My view of modern churches is, that they have an $X monthly minimum budget to operate. In USA it can be thousands of dollars, in Kazakhstan - hundreds. Still, they need money-money-money (which makes the world go round). If they do not receive $X or more every month, they're in big trouble, they can get into debt and then go bankrupt. Constant need of money. They can't really earn money today like in the old days, when churches owned land, peasants, manufacturing facilities etc. Today, they're mostly stripped of those feudalist or capitalist privileges and can only collect donations. Churches on odd occasions rent out their premises, but that's not their main business and doesn't cover $X.

I see it as a big problem. Because church as organization isn't forced by serving Jesus anymore, but by this constant "Damoclis gladius" hanging over their heads... Constantly finding $X this way or another to survive, turning them into a parasite of society... It's very bad, I think. Very bad. Very corrupting.

What do you think?

 

[PollyJetix]

It is interesting in 1 corinthians 9 Paul is referrencing food, a vineyard produces food, cattle milk. That is food and drink not money. Paul did not say give me money did he but somehow this is such a stronghold in peoples mind. Why? Because it has been beaten into us that this is money. Paul even quotes Jesus from Luke 6 in 1 Timothy to Timothy, do not muzzle the ox. What does the muzzle stop the ox from doing? Eating...last time I checked oxen do not use money.

1 Timothy 5:18 "For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward."
That's money.

Try paying your utilities with food and drink. Preachers are modern humans, and have modern bills. They don't live in nomad tents.