-Removed-All church's have rents, power, chairs, toilet paper, paper and pencils, etc. to buy, where is your conflict of taking 10% of what is his and putting towards his cause.
No they don't only the ones where a property is owned by someone who wants the congregation to pay their bills. Get out of your denominational, octopus mindset and think NT and meeting in homes etc
You mentioned meeting in homes. When do you cross the line from non-organized to organized church, 5, 10, 50, 100 people? And who is the leader, is money taken in, what is done with the money. I assume you live in the UK? based on some of the words that you have used. Perhaps the church idea is different there than it is here in the US. I am not defending anything, but I do know that the service of the kingdom costs money, bringing clean drinking water to villages where there is none is a good thing and it costs money. Organizations (churches) that feed people in desolate parts of the world is a good thing and costs money. I mean no disrespect here, but to say all denominations are all about the dollar is short sighted.
Jesus even had a guy in charge of the money bag.
Are you seriously holding up Judas' as an example!
Jesus had money accounts, this is the point I was trying to make... not that a thief had anything to do with it.
... don't you think it is worth it?
I'm going to annoy you here, sorry. I see all that as works of the flesh done by corporate religion to justify the methods and create a sense of righteousness for the laitiy, which is exactly what you have and why you posted it here in defense of your organisation. It's not about the actual work in these countries it is the spirit behind it which is 'as dirty rags'. Corporate religion is a money-making enterprise set up by and run for the elect few and driven by the corporations or individuals who own the property. In the end it all comes down to real estate and someones salary/pension. Just look hard at the numbers in your church's financial report my friend...do they even publish it?
I am not annoyed by your comments by any means. It seems to me that you take issue with those that own property, in this case specifically churches... and I can appreciate that, perhaps you were wronged in some way. There has been many 'bad' examples of what you speak and it puts a sour taste in everybody's mouth. I know there are churches that form and then goto the bank, get credit and the pastor is on the hook (pastor owned). There are churches that form and then goto the bank, get credit and the congregation is on the hook (church owned, or at least by the particular committed individuals, elders usually) this type of setup was how it was at a church I use to belong to, although I was not involved financially at the time. The unique thing with this setup it takes the monetary commitment from the congregation to make it work.
I believe giving to the church with your finances is an expression of a commitment to God, I also believe that God honors that commitment. All too often we let money become a sticking point in such matters, maybe we are serving two masters or trying to anyways, in spite of what the scriptures say about this.
l never again entangle myself in the octopus arms of the denominational cults.
I don't blame you, I wouldn't either.
I hope this clarifies a thing or two about what I was trying to say.