Should a pastor know individual "giving" information?

[Bravo]

Years ago was it the church that determined that folks wore a shirt and tie to the game or society?

I believe it was society.  Of course, more people attended church during this time period.  Unfortunately, as society has deteriorated the church has followed a few steps behind.

With all the scandals from churches and clergymen maybe the church declined first and society followed?

 

[RAIDER]

Years ago was it the church that determined that folks wore a shirt and tie to the game or society?

I believe it was society.  Of course, more people attended church during this time period.  Unfortunately, as society has deteriorated the church has followed a few steps behind.

With all the scandals from churches and clergymen maybe the church declined first and society followed?

I blame The Beatles! 

 

[Mathew Ward]

Years ago was it the church that determined that folks wore a shirt and tie to the game or society?

I believe it was society.  Of course, more people attended church during this time period.  Unfortunately, as society has deteriorated the church has followed a few steps behind.

With all the scandals from churches and clergymen maybe the church declined first and society followed?

I blame The Beatles! 

It was the whole British Invasion

 

[subllibrm]

I would not say going from a suit and tie or church dress at a ballgame to a pair of jeans and a t-shirt or a skirt is deteriorating dress.  That would be change.  I would say that going from a suit and tie or church dress at a ballgame to barechested drunk men and half dressed women is deteriorating.

While I think this whole thread is an exercise in silly nonsense (to the OP, no it is none of the pastor's business) I will weigh in here and admit that my wife and I do all of our visiting drunk and half dressed.  We saw it at the ball game.  8)

 

[subllibrm]

Years ago was it the church that determined that folks wore a shirt and tie to the game or society?

I believe it was society.  Of course, more people attended church during this time period.  Unfortunately, as society has deteriorated the church has followed a few steps behind.

With all the scandals from churches and clergymen maybe the church declined first and society followed?

True enough. The bible says "if my people will ... I will heal their land". No doubt that lack of holiness with in the church has culpability for the state of our society. The problem is the definition of holiness was so our of whack that the church thought they could cover their dead bones with the whited sepulchers of suit and tie.

It bears re quoting:

"Jesus didn't come to make bad men good, He came to make dead men live" - Ravi Zacharias

The church has been off track for years trying to do the former to the detriment of the latter. We just ended up with more well dressed corpses with a false sense of security. IMO

 

[16KJV11]

There is a man in my church who goes soul winning every Saturday.
Some days he wears blue jeans with holes in them.
Some days he wears shorts in the summer time.
I don't tell him what to wear though I have made suggestions.
I'm just glad he come soul winning.
But if you worked as my assistant pastor and were making visits for the church, I would ask you to wear at least a collared shirt and a pair of docker style pants.
I quit wearing a tie on visitation ages ago.
I know, I'll send in my Hacker card in the mail today!

As far as the music goes, I don't care for the hip hop head banging lifestyle.
I believe it is worldly and often ungodly.
I would never say that those who sing that style and say they are Christian are not Christians.
But I do believe they set a worldly wrong example and appeal more to the flesh than the spirit.
You can disagree with me on these issues and that's ok.
But as long as I am pastor of this church, those who indulge in that kind of music and lifestyle will not hold positions of leadership.

So your preference as the pastor is the deciding factor on folks of leadership of the church you pastor.

It started out with giving and you have added other preferences you have as pastor and that those follow your preferences.

So much for the requirements in 1 Timothy and Titus being enough, right?

Friend, I wouldn't let someone who listened to headbanging/rap music (even if it was so-called Christian) who lived that kind of lifestyle date my daughters let alone be a leader in the church.
There is something to Romans 12:2 that you guys are missing here.
Romans 12:2 (KJV)
And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Well, says the hermeneutical genius, it's the world system.
What kind of ridiculous invisible system is this you are talking about?
There is something definite that you can see.
You can't conform to something you cannot see.
Hollywood and New York come up with some punky styles, teenagers go gaga over it and we're supposed to swallow it b/c we have liberty in Christ.
Whether it's britches that hang down so low you can see the butt crack of the wearer, or jeans and spandex so tight that you can see a dimple on a persons backside.
We're just supposed to say, well, we've got individual soul liberty, just accept it.
Whatever happened to moderation, modesty and humility?

Well, I can't tell so and so what to wear it to church, but as long as I'm pastor, no person will be in leadership whose lifestyle copies the world's lifestyles.
Believe me, I'm not ignoring the biblical mandates of leadership and I'm not adding any either.
It's the command to all Christians that we shouldn't exemplify the world and it's my job as pastor to have enough prudence and wisdom to screen all potential leaders in the church (deacons, teachers, etc.) before they are elected or appointed their positions.

Last year, I heard a secular radio show, might have been Hannity, where they were interviewing cabbies in New York who were getting rolled by gang bangers.
You know what those racist, Pharisaical cabbies did?
They quit picking up people dressed like gang bangers.
And you guys can't figure out what the world's standards are?

And just as an addendum:
I'm not saying that we don't welcome people who dress like the world and listen to worldly music to our church.
We will not only welcome them, we'll love them, help them, give to them, sacrifice for them, visit them, cry with them, rejoice with them,  teach them, let them join the church and let them serve in certain areas of the ministry.
They just won't be the leadership until their outward reveals the modesty that they are developing on the inside.
And while I'm on the topic, I've seen lots of outwardly 'dressed right, livin' right' Christians that I wouldn't let scrape the floor in Jesus name.
They are backstabbing and proud as the day is long, mean as rattlesnakes or as carnal as Solomon was.
Dress standards, music preference, or Bible version conviction make not a leader or even a spiritual person.

 

[rsc2a]

As I said earlier:

The problem with the "culture of the day" isn't pants or piercings or music genre. It's hyper-individualism, massive consumerism/materialism, a lack of integrity (and I'm talking about a whole lot more than verbal lies to another), failure to see the spiritual in the ordinary, lack of empathy, turning ideologies into idols...all of which can be summed up in one word:

Pride.

 

[bgwilkinson]

Years ago was it the church that determined that folks wore a shirt and tie to the game or society?

I believe it was society.  Of course, more people attended church during this time period.  Unfortunately, as society has deteriorated the church has followed a few steps behind.

With all the scandals from churches and clergymen maybe the church declined first and society followed?

I blame The Beatles! 

It was the whole British Invasion

What's so bad about the British, after all we owe them a great debt for providing our English Bible. 

British is good.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

As I said earlier:

The problem with the "culture of the day" isn't pants or piercings or music genre. It's hyper-individualism, massive consumerism/materialism, a lack of integrity (and I'm talking about a whole lot more than verbal lies to another), failure to see the spiritual in the ordinary, lack of empathy, turning ideologies into idols...all of which can be summed up in one word:

Pride.

Now if you stretched it out to two words, would it read Republican Party?

I just had to go there.

 

[RAIDER]

While I think this whole thread is an exercise in silly nonsense (to the OP, no it is none of the pastor's business) I will weigh in here and admit that my wife and I do all of our visiting drunk and half dressed.  We saw it at the ball game.  8)

What you consider "silly nonsense" others consider an important issue.  You many have noticed a couple of pastors expressing their different points of views.  After you and your wife finish your visiting I believe it would be a good exercise for you to start a thread that isn't "silly nonsense".

 

[subllibrm]

While I think this whole thread is an exercise in silly nonsense (to the OP, no it is none of the pastor's business) I will weigh in here and admit that my wife and I do all of our visiting drunk and half dressed.  We saw it at the ball game.  8)

What you consider "silly nonsense" others consider an important issue.  You many have noticed a couple of pastors expressing their different points of views.  After you and your wife finish your visiting I believe it would be a good exercise for you to start a thread that isn't "silly nonsense".

Obviously your satire receptor is broken.

 

[Mathew Ward]

While I think this whole thread is an exercise in silly nonsense (to the OP, no it is none of the pastor's business) I will weigh in here and admit that my wife and I do all of our visiting drunk and half dressed.  We saw it at the ball game.  8)

What you consider "silly nonsense" others consider an important issue.  You many have noticed a couple of pastors expressing their different points of views.  After you and your wife finish your visiting I believe it would be a good exercise for you to start a thread that isn't "silly nonsense".

Obviously your satire receptor is broken.

Stinkin' HACkers do not have satire receptors...

 

[sword]

I understand the tithe is intended to support the local church but when discussing a persons tithe scripturally would that not include all giving done through the local church or just the segment designated for support of building and staff.

In that number would you exclude:

1. Faith promise giving
2. Money designated for a specific ministry such as bus or children’s ministry
3. Good & services given to the church
4. Building fund giving
5. Tract fund giving

Just wanted to see what you all thought and why. I have several friends that believe Faith promise, as most churches practice it, is not scriptural.

What say ye?

 

[RAIDER]

I have several friends that believe Faith promise, as most churches practice it, is not scriptural.

What say ye?

What makes FPM unscriptural>

 

[sword]

I have several friends that believe Faith promise, as most churches practice it, is not scriptural.

What say ye?

What makes FPM unscriptural>

They think all the money should go to the general budget of the church & the mission support should come out of the general budget. I don't buy it but thats their take. Traditionally missionaries were supported out of a churches general budget & I guess they feel it should still be handled that way.

Not sure the orgin of FPM but I know its a fairly new concept. Some pastors preach that you don't give a dime to any other ministry or purpose until your tithe is completely paid. In many churches if the designated FPM giving is not enough to cover that months mission obligation the missionaries get shorted. Money is never taken from the general budget even though most missionaries live on much tighter budgets than any of us.

What the scriptual basis behind FPM? Clearly its not a bad thing, but is it the new testment method for supporting missionaries?

 

[prophet]

I have several friends that believe Faith promise, as most churches practice it, is not scriptural.

What say ye?

What makes FPM unscriptural>

Maybe this:
Luk 11:41
41 But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.
Rom 13:8
8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another:for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

Or the lack of its mention, by default, makes it unscriptural.

Or the fact that it requires faith by one party, the giver, but eliminates faith for the receiver.

Anishinaabe

 

[sword]

There is no question supporting missionaries is scripitual and my position is FPM is one very effective method by which that goal is achieved. Their point is some churches & their large staffs began to live beyond what offerings would support so FPM was created.  Churches designated the tithe (first 10%) to support the local ministry only and then if people wanted to give beyond that then we would support missions and other programs.

 

[RAIDER]

They think all the money should go to the general budget of the church & the mission support should come out of the general budget. I don't buy it but thats their take. Traditionally missionaries were supported out of a churches general budget & I guess they feel it should still be handled that way.

Not sure the orgin of FPM but I know its a fairly new concept. Some pastors preach that you don't give a dime to any other ministry or purpose until your tithe is completely paid. In many churches if the designated FPM giving is not enough to cover that months mission obligation the missionaries get shorted. Money is never taken from the general budget even though most missionaries live on much tighter budgets than any of us.

What the scriptual basis behind FPM? Clearly its not a bad thing, but is it the new testment method for supporting missionaries?

I have only had good experiences with FPM.  I grew up in a GARBC church that supported missionaries through the general budget.  The church ran about 200 and supported a limited number of missionaries.

I have been a member of two churches that use the FPM.  During Mission's Conference each year we make our FPM pledges.  Basically we are saying, "This is the amount I will give over and above my tithe as God gives it to me".  In both situations the mission's giving and mission's programs have exploded.  We have been able to take on several new missionaries each year, as well as increase the support of current missionaries.

FPM has also given several of our members an increased heart for missions.  We have people that take mission's trips each year.  We also have young people from our church going to mission fields full time.

   

 

[Baptist City Holdout]

If nothing else, FPM keeps the missions needs current in the lives of the people. Missions becomes an ongoing burden and something in which to participate, rather than a line on the church budget.

 

[rsc2a]

Missions becomes an ongoing burden and something in which to participate, rather than a line on the church budget.

If people aren't consistently being reminded that their neighborhoods and workplaces are their mission fields, something is wrong.