What shouldn't the Church use tithe money for?

[Tarheel Baptist]

So, you're arguing that Jesus didn't want their to be a church...IMHO, that's a moot point ( and a Biblically ludicrious argument, IMO).


That is not what I said, yet it IS what I said. Jesus DID want there to be a church but not made into an organization.

A church that has an organization, structure etc. gives MORE to what you say you're concerned about.


Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

It is true Dan....absolutely true!
Your breakdown would break down in the real world.
Rick Warren and Saddleback have overhead costs above our church's entire budget, but give exponentially more to the poor and needy than our church.

If you want the poor, downcast and needy to be cared for, larger churches give much, much more than smaller churches who give more than house churches....

If the larger churches didn't have organization and leadership, there would ultimately be NO money because there would be less....no people to give the money.

Our church began in a house....and while we were in the house, our giving to the poor and needy was a pittance compared to what we are able to do now.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

Illustration:

Suppose a group of people 20 was told by God to leave New York where they were and travel to Los Angeles. This group chose to take a plane instead of cars so they all get on a plane together and head out to LA. While enroute, suppose God then spoke to them telling them to go to Dallas, Omaha, Daytona, Portland and Denver as well because He has divine appointments for them in each of those cities. They can't jump the plane, reroute it, or move it away from its chartered course.

But this same group headed in a caravan of 5 cars of 4 people, they could all head to LA yet move to another destination that God has intended for them on the way. The nature of the small group listening to God brings about better mobility for God's service and gives God more servants the ability to move more quickly to where He wants them to be.

Not sure what that even means in the context of this debate. Anything a house group can do, a larger church can do...except they have more people and other resources to do more....

If Jim has 3 apples and Tom has 3 oranges, how many shingles does it take to put a roof on the barn?

 

[Smellin Coffee]

So, you're arguing that Jesus didn't want their to be a church...IMHO, that's a moot point ( and a Biblically ludicrious argument, IMO).


That is not what I said, yet it IS what I said. Jesus DID want there to be a church but not made into an organization.

A church that has an organization, structure etc. gives MORE to what you say you're concerned about.


Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

It is true Dan....absolutely true!
Your breakdown would break down in the real world.
Rick Warren and Saddleback have overhead costs above our church's entire budget, but give exponentially more to the poor and needy than our church.

If you want the poor, downcast and needy to be cared for, larger churches give much, much more than smaller churches who give more than house churches....

If the larger churches didn't have organization and leadership, there would ultimately be NO money because there would be less....no people to give the money.

Our church began in a house....and while we were in the house, our giving to the poor and needy was a pittance compared to what we are able to do now.

I'm not going to change anyone's mind because 1. it is not my intent and 2. I couldn't if I wanted to because it is so counter-cultural, so my point really doesn't matter anyway, but regardless of the giving amount or any stories, the structural idea of the church as an organization goes against Jesus ideal of it being an organism instead. 500 people surrendered to God in 20 different groups will give as much if not more than 500 people surrendered to God in 1 group, when the Spirit is actually leading. Now out of peer pressure and coersion, well, maybe the larger group might collect more.

Will a group of 500 give more than a group of 25? Certainly. Will a single group of 500 give more than 20 different groups of 25 collectively? And without salary and building overhead? I doubt it. And will the giving be disbursed to more places (though lesser amounts) in the group of 500 or the 20 groups of 25? I believe the latter.

Again, my opinion and nothing more.

 

[Smellin Coffee]

Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

Illustration:

Suppose a group of people 20 was told by God to leave New York where they were and travel to Los Angeles. This group chose to take a plane instead of cars so they all get on a plane together and head out to LA. While enroute, suppose God then spoke to them telling them to go to Dallas, Omaha, Daytona, Portland and Denver as well because He has divine appointments for them in each of those cities. They can't jump the plane, reroute it, or move it away from its chartered course.

But this same group headed in a caravan of 5 cars of 4 people, they could all head to LA yet move to another destination that God has intended for them on the way. The nature of the small group listening to God brings about better mobility for God's service and gives God more servants the ability to move more quickly to where He wants them to be.

Not sure what that even means in the context of this debate. Anything a house group can do, a larger church can do...except they have more people and other resources to do more....

If Jim has 3 apples and Tom has 3 oranges, how many shingles does it take to put a roof on the barn?

Of course it isn't understood. It goes against everything we believe about Christianity.

The church has 6 apples and gives them to one needy person.

Jim has 3 apples and Tom has 3 oranges and each gives an individual piece of fruit to meet momentary need so instead of one person receiving 6 pieces of fruit, 6 people get one. So to how many is the love of Christ shown? One or six? Does it really matter?

And what kind of an impact does it make on Jim and Tom when they PERSONALLY AND INDIVIDUALLY GIVE to the needy instead of bringing in the fruit to one spot to make a fruit basket for someone they will never meet?

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

So, you're arguing that Jesus didn't want their to be a church...IMHO, that's a moot point ( and a Biblically ludicrious argument, IMO).


That is not what I said, yet it IS what I said. Jesus DID want there to be a church but not made into an organization.

A church that has an organization, structure etc. gives MORE to what you say you're concerned about.


Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

It is true Dan....absolutely true!
Your breakdown would break down in the real world.
Rick Warren and Saddleback have overhead costs above our church's entire budget, but give exponentially more to the poor and needy than our church.

If you want the poor, downcast and needy to be cared for, larger churches give much, much more than smaller churches who give more than house churches....

If the larger churches didn't have organization and leadership, there would ultimately be NO money because there would be less....no people to give the money.

Our church began in a house....and while we were in the house, our giving to the poor and needy was a pittance compared to what we are able to do now.

I'm not going to change anyone's mind because 1. it is not my intent and 2. I couldn't if I wanted to because it is so counter-cultural, so my point really doesn't matter anyway, but regardless of the giving amount or any stories, the structural idea of the church as an organization goes against Jesus ideal of it being an organism instead. 500 people surrendered to God in 20 different groups will give as much if not more than 500 people surrendered to God in 1 group, when the Spirit is actually leading. Now out of peer pressure and coersion, well, maybe the larger group might collect more.

Will a group of 500 give more than a group of 25? Certainly. Will a single group of 500 give more than 20 different groups of 25 collectively? And without salary and building overhead? I doubt it. And will the giving be disbursed to more places (though lesser amounts) in the group of 500 or the 20 groups of 25? I believe the latter.

Again, my opinion and nothing more.

You make an assumption there would be 20 groups of 25...that just doesn't happen.
We started out as a group of 9...but grew, organized, grew and give more...exponentially more than the group of nine with no overhead.

You are entitled to your own opinion....but not your own facts.
Your opinion is based on assumption...wishful thinking, but not fact.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

Illustration:

Suppose a group of people 20 was told by God to leave New York where they were and travel to Los Angeles. This group chose to take a plane instead of cars so they all get on a plane together and head out to LA. While enroute, suppose God then spoke to them telling them to go to Dallas, Omaha, Daytona, Portland and Denver as well because He has divine appointments for them in each of those cities. They can't jump the plane, reroute it, or move it away from its chartered course.

But this same group headed in a caravan of 5 cars of 4 people, they could all head to LA yet move to another destination that God has intended for them on the way. The nature of the small group listening to God brings about better mobility for God's service and gives God more servants the ability to move more quickly to where He wants them to be.

Not sure what that even means in the context of this debate. Anything a house group can do, a larger church can do...except they have more people and other resources to do more....

If Jim has 3 apples and Tom has 3 oranges, how many shingles does it take to put a roof on the barn?

Of course it isn't understood. It goes against everything we believe about Christianity.

The church has 6 apples and gives them to one needy person.

Jim has 3 apples and Tom has 3 oranges and each gives an individual piece of fruit to meet momentary need so instead of one person receiving 6 pieces of fruit, 6 people get one. So to how many is the love of Christ shown? One or six? Does it really matter?

And what kind of an impact does it make on Jim and Tom when they PERSONALLY AND INDIVIDUALLY GIVE to the needy instead of bringing in the fruit to one spot to make a fruit basket for someone they will never meet?

Never meet?
Again, a false straw man argument.

Who do you think purchases and distributes the food at our food pantry?
who do you think works our block parties and tutoring programs in the housing projects?
Who do you think goes on our mission trips?

Please!

 

[Smellin Coffee]

So, you're arguing that Jesus didn't want their to be a church...IMHO, that's a moot point ( and a Biblically ludicrious argument, IMO).


That is not what I said, yet it IS what I said. Jesus DID want there to be a church but not made into an organization.

A church that has an organization, structure etc. gives MORE to what you say you're concerned about.


Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

It is true Dan....absolutely true!
Your breakdown would break down in the real world.
Rick Warren and Saddleback have overhead costs above our church's entire budget, but give exponentially more to the poor and needy than our church.

If you want the poor, downcast and needy to be cared for, larger churches give much, much more than smaller churches who give more than house churches....

If the larger churches didn't have organization and leadership, there would ultimately be NO money because there would be less....no people to give the money.

Our church began in a house....and while we were in the house, our giving to the poor and needy was a pittance compared to what we are able to do now.

I'm not going to change anyone's mind because 1. it is not my intent and 2. I couldn't if I wanted to because it is so counter-cultural, so my point really doesn't matter anyway, but regardless of the giving amount or any stories, the structural idea of the church as an organization goes against Jesus ideal of it being an organism instead. 500 people surrendered to God in 20 different groups will give as much if not more than 500 people surrendered to God in 1 group, when the Spirit is actually leading. Now out of peer pressure and coersion, well, maybe the larger group might collect more.

Will a group of 500 give more than a group of 25? Certainly. Will a single group of 500 give more than 20 different groups of 25 collectively? And without salary and building overhead? I doubt it. And will the giving be disbursed to more places (though lesser amounts) in the group of 500 or the 20 groups of 25? I believe the latter.

Again, my opinion and nothing more.

You make an assumption there would be 20 groups of 25...that just doesn't happen.
We started out as a group of 9...but grew, organized, grew and give more...exponentially more than the group of nine with no overhead.

You are entitled to your own opinion....but not your own facts.
Your opinion is based on assumption...wishful thinking, but not fact.

It's not me you have to answer to someday (or ever). So how you take the teachings of Christ is your concern, not mine. If you can answer away that His words weren't really what He meant, then that is your choice for which you are accountable.

I can only answer to Him for myself.

I've said my heart. Carry on.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

So, you're arguing that Jesus didn't want their to be a church...IMHO, that's a moot point ( and a Biblically ludicrious argument, IMO).


That is not what I said, yet it IS what I said. Jesus DID want there to be a church but not made into an organization.

A church that has an organization, structure etc. gives MORE to what you say you're concerned about.


Not only is that contrary to the teachings of Jesus, it is not true. Take a church of 500 members. Break that into 20 "house" congregations of 25 members each. Though the giving may not be geared toward the same source (say, Missionary Johnson), their giving would still be expected and without building expenses, more could be given toward local, ministering groups or though "personal contact" outside any organization. That would take the $200 that the big church would normally give to Missionary Johnson and it would be distributed as Christ leads each of the congregation. Christ has more control as to who will receive what through disbursement by spreading the giving around rather than 500 people making a decision to commit to monthly support of one person. And that $2000 a month for mortgage/utilities would be monies that each group could gear toward SPECIFIC need of one within the congregation or outside the congregation.

It is a "fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants" giving system, relying on how Jesus wants EACH SMALL GROUP to distribute. That would mean the Holy Spirit control and the way our churches are set up, naturally they limit His control.

It is true Dan....absolutely true!
Your breakdown would break down in the real world.
Rick Warren and Saddleback have overhead costs above our church's entire budget, but give exponentially more to the poor and needy than our church.

If you want the poor, downcast and needy to be cared for, larger churches give much, much more than smaller churches who give more than house churches....

If the larger churches didn't have organization and leadership, there would ultimately be NO money because there would be less....no people to give the money.

Our church began in a house....and while we were in the house, our giving to the poor and needy was a pittance compared to what we are able to do now.

I'm not going to change anyone's mind because 1. it is not my intent and 2. I couldn't if I wanted to because it is so counter-cultural, so my point really doesn't matter anyway, but regardless of the giving amount or any stories, the structural idea of the church as an organization goes against Jesus ideal of it being an organism instead. 500 people surrendered to God in 20 different groups will give as much if not more than 500 people surrendered to God in 1 group, when the Spirit is actually leading. Now out of peer pressure and coersion, well, maybe the larger group might collect more.

Will a group of 500 give more than a group of 25? Certainly. Will a single group of 500 give more than 20 different groups of 25 collectively? And without salary and building overhead? I doubt it. And will the giving be disbursed to more places (though lesser amounts) in the group of 500 or the 20 groups of 25? I believe the latter.

Again, my opinion and nothing more.

You make an assumption there would be 20 groups of 25...that just doesn't happen.
We started out as a group of 9...but grew, organized, grew and give more...exponentially more than the group of nine with no overhead.

You are entitled to your own opinion....but not your own facts.
Your opinion is based on assumption...wishful thinking, but not fact.

It's not me you have to answer to someday (or ever). So how you take the teachings of Christ is your concern, not mine. If you can answer away that His words weren't really what He meant, then that is your choice for which you are accountable.
can only answer to Him for myself.

I've said my heart. Carry on.

I am certainly aware of and very thankful for the fact that I answer to God for myself....as you are I'm sure. 

I do not doubt your sincerity, but I believe to are sincerely wrong.
All of that aside, if the issue is helping the poor, needy and unfortunate....the large, structured, staffed churches and ministries do that with great scope and efficiency.

 

[kaba]

I totally agree with you Tarheel.

 

[sword]

I think both views are correct.

There are things churches (or groups of churches) can do that individuals cannot do. Hosting a large conference for teens or bringing in a speaker from across the country or putting missionaries on the field would all be very difficult for a small church or individual to do on their own. On the other hand only the small local church can provide the outreach and ministry that is needed in a small rural town. Likewise only individuals can provide the love and individual testimony to neighbors and co-workers. Money is only a tool to help us do what God commanded us to do.

I think whether a large church or small  we should join with other like churches on major projects.  At the same time we should act like a small church as much as possible when ministering to church members and the community. Churches, regardless of size, should be made up of Christians who live their lives ministering to others. Every day we should reach out to those around us just as Jesus did. Alone or in small groups we should strive to “be like Christ” in all that we do. One person at a time, we should attempt to change the world.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

I think both views are correct.

There are things churches (or groups of churches) can do that individuals cannot do. Hosting a large conference for teens or bringing in a speaker from across the country or putting missionaries on the field would all be very difficult for a small church or individual to do on their own. On the other hand only the small local church can provide the outreach and ministry that is needed in a small rural town. Likewise only individuals can provide the love and individual testimony to neighbors and co-workers. Money is only a tool to help us do what God commanded us to do.

I think whether a large church or small  we should join with other like churches on major projects.  At the same time we should act like a small church as much as possible when ministering to church members and the community. Churches, regardless of size, should be made up of Christians who live their lives ministering to others. Every day we should reach out to those around us just as Jesus did. Alone or in small groups we should strive to “be like Christ” in all that we do. One person at a time, we should attempt to change the world.

I agree with the gist of your post.
The larger a church gets, the level of intimacy in the body does lessen. Our church, certainly no mega church, but large in the eyes of some, struggles at times to 'act like a small church'.  We do that thru small groups, as almost every other church does. But, we are able to do things that no small church could do...because we can pool our resources. And, Rick Warren or Bill Hybles congregations can do things we could only dream about....in spite of their higher overhead.