Banks foreclosing on churches in record numbers

[David_TheMan]

You made the statement that pastoring is not a full time job. I'm simply providing clear real world examples as to why it definitely is. Obviously some pastors work as well depending on the situation but many work full time in ministry and contrary to what you're saying they definitely do a full 40's worth or work. That's my point.
Every verse you're quoting clearly states that the teachers should be provided for. You're also ignoring the fact that later Jesus did instruct his disciples to take money belts with them so clearly he wasn't against having or making money. And the point of all of it was that the preachers of the gospel could and should be provided for by those they ministered to. Paul reinforced that while also saying that if it became a problem he would do other work, not because a minister wasn't doing work worthy of being provided for but for the sake of the gospel. So if a church can't pay a pastor or chooses not to then fine, that's their prerogative, but its not wrong to do so, especially when the pastor is doing worthy work that goes far beyond a sermon on Sunday morning.

I know what statement I made. It isn't.
Simple as that to me. If it is to your father, fine, it is what it is.

None of the verses say a pastor or minister should be paid.
The Jesus verse specifically mentions not taking any money or silver or gold. Specifically. It doesn't allude it says explicitly.
Paul continually says he wants people to emulate himself and not take any money and simply serve.

As for your claim that Jesus instructs his disciples to take money belts with them, you are clearly taking a verse out of context.
Jesus told them to take their purse and sell their cloak to buy swords for the fulfilment of his prophecy.

Luke 22
35Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" "Nothing," they answered. 36He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors'; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment." 38 The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That's enough!" he replied.

See you don't have any scriptural support to support Jesus okaying the paying of his followers for spreading his message. According to Jesus it is the exact opposite, and quite frankly he doesn't want people to accumulate any wealth.

Paul didn't reinforce anything jesus said. Jesus explicitly said you aren't to gather wealth on earth or worry about money or your next meal, God will provide and take care of you. Paul actual contradicts him in talking about earning money and him supposedly having a right to be paid, when Jesus says the opposite. Just one of the many contradictions in the new testament and Paul in relation to Jesus.

Like I said before though, historically speaking protestants formed to initially stop the support of the clerical class. Churches from de-accesorized and deliberately made simple, preists were called from the clergy itself, and the priests were expected to provide for themselves financially, not burden the congregation. This is what they were protesting with regard to the catholic church.

 

[#1 pick]

These black pastors know these stats....last church I went to last year...the pastor was going HARD on the money talk .....on the projector, they kept showing how you could text your tithes...u don't even gotta come to church...just text God's money


I'm actually thinking the for profit churches might be killing the competition.....people like that money talk more than that be like Jesus talk....some churches are growing while others are going outta business

The problem isn't just to money talk, it's ancient in the church. Everyone in the church like 60 and older.You gotta have young members. You gotta have families. Don't and you are done. Thecoli likes to talk about the false profit churches because they known and wealthy and thecoli a bunch of demons anyway but most struggling.

 

[#1 pick]

It absolutely needs to be celebrated IMO. Black people in America have no business being Christians. That's the religion of our slave masters.

There are more religions than Christianity. Nothing was wrong with it 2000 or even 1000 years ago. We got white washed version of it now but what isn't white washed that we get in Black America? Tell Middle Schoolers to stop going to school because it's white washed. Brehs, you my dude but don't go there. Not with this one.

 

[#1 pick]

I can't say church has done more good than bad but there are good things that churches provide for the community....the thing is a community center can replace a church and basically do the same shyt without the God part...the religion aspect of church is very outdated imo....why can't we sing and have lectures about improving our lives in a community center?

The community center hasn't come close to replacing anything close to a church. Most members on this board couldn't tell you where there's is at without Internet search.

 

[Ronnie Lott]

Yeah less places for black people to congregate in a positive manner is never good regardless if you hold the same ideology of the church. People really letting their hate for religion not realize what that means.

This

 

[The Coochie Assassin]

The community center hasn't come close to replacing anything close to a church. Most members on this board couldn't tell you where there's is at without Internet search.

The church will be replaced whether y'all like it or not. Like you said, church full of old people. Why?

Because church is outdated and future generations won't be sitting down listening to a preacher yell for an hour. If we want to be ahead of the inevitable change, we need to invest in different infrastructure that can leave a positive impact and let these churches close down instead of trying to save them and waste more time and money.

 

[Verbal Kint]

I know what statement I made. It isn't.
Simple as that to me. If it is to your father, fine, it is what it is.

None of the verses say a pastor or minister should be paid.
The Jesus verse specifically mentions not taking any money or silver or gold. Specifically. It doesn't allude it says explicitly.
Paul continually says he wants people to emulate himself and not take any money and simply serve.

As for your claim that Jesus instructs his disciples to take money belts with them, you are clearly taking a verse out of context.
Jesus told them to take their purse and sell their cloak to buy swords for the fulfilment of his prophecy.



See you don't have any scriptural support to support Jesus okaying the paying of his followers for spreading his message. According to Jesus it is the exact opposite, and quite frankly he doesn't want people to accumulate any wealth.

Paul didn't reinforce anything jesus said. Jesus explicitly said you aren't to gather wealth on earth or worry about money or your next meal, God will provide and take care of you. Paul actual contradicts him in talking about earning money and him supposedly having a right to be paid, when Jesus says the opposite. Just one of the many contradictions in the new testament and Paul in relation to Jesus.

Like I said before though, historically speaking protestants formed to initially stop the support of the clerical class. Churches from de-accesorized and deliberately made simple, preists were called from the clergy itself, and the priests were expected to provide for themselves financially, not burden the congregation. This is what they were protesting with regard to the catholic church.

I'm not going to keep going back and forth with you with you on this. You're making poor arguments for stances that are clearly oppposite of the view that the vast majority of pastors and biblical scholars hold and that's fine, but logic and reason aren't really things you seem to be interested in so I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you about it

 

[David_TheMan]

I'm not going to keep going back and forth with you with you on this. You're making poor arguments for stances that are clearly oppposite of the view that the vast majority of pastors and biblical scholars hold and that's fine, but logic and reason aren't really things you seem to be interested in so I'm not going to waste my time arguing with you about it

I'm talking about fact though.
I don't have to say whether anyone agrees with me or who has the biggest group supporting me, because I'm making a argument of fact, not one of popularity.

The fact that you've yet to actually make a logical biblically supported argument about the bible supporting paid pastors is telling.
You've referenced Paul to try to support your argument, yet I've posted multiple verses from him saying he refuses to be paid for his service and that he wants other to copy him in not being paid.
I've posted direct verses from Jesus Christ, who specifically told his followers to go spread his word and not worry about money, housing, or anything else, god will provide. You ignore this and some how try to claim its okay to get paid and that this is what he says in the verse, when specifically in the verse he tells his people not to take any money and to leave their money bags behind.

I then talk about factual historical stances which originated the protestantism practiced by the majority of the black church. The stances of Calvin, Luther, and John Wesley when they were starting their movement and why they actually made decisions they made regarding how protestants wanted to act compared to Catholics. You ignore this.

I know you have an idea you want to believe in and that you will believe in no matter what, thats coo. I never attacked you for believing different. I simply disagree with you.

 

[Verbal Kint]

I'm talking about fact though.
I don't have to say whether anyone agrees with me or who has the biggest group supporting me, because I'm making a argument of fact, not one of popularity.

The fact that you've yet to actually make a logical biblically supported argument about the bible supporting paid pastors is telling.
You've referenced Paul to try to support your argument, yet I've posted multiple verses from him saying he refuses to be paid for his service and that he wants other to copy him in not being paid.
I've posted direct verses from Jesus Christ, who specifically told his followers to go spread his word and not worry about money, housing, or anything else, god will provide. You ignore this and some how try to claim its okay to get paid and that this is what he says in the verse, when specifically in the verse he tells his people not to take any money and to leave their money bags behind.

I then talk about factual historical stances which originated the protestantism practiced by the majority of the black church. The stances of Calvin, Luther, and John Wesley when they were starting their movement and why they actually made decisions they made regarding how protestants wanted to act compared to Catholics. You ignore this.

I know you have an idea you want to believe in and that you will believe in no matter what, thats coo. I never attacked you for believing different. I simply disagree with you.

Every verse either of us has posted the other has come out with the exact opposite interpretation of it. So this is pointless. You claim everything I'm saying is made up while yours is fact. Truth is that's fine if you think that, but you need to realize your view is the small minority and most people who study these things for a living would strongly disagree with you. So if you don't care what they have to say why should I continue to waste time on this conversation?

 

[David_TheMan]

Every verse either of us has posted the other has come out with the exact opposite interpretation of it. So this is pointless. You claim everything I'm saying is made up while yours is fact. Truth is that's fine if you think that, but you need to realize your view is the small minority and most people who study these things for a living would strongly disagree with you. So if you don't care what they have to say why should I continue to waste time on this conversation?

When you cite verses and claim they mean what you want or support what you want, instead of what the actual verses actually argue for and say, of course we'll come out on the opposite side. Which is why when I'm in these discussion about the bible I usually try to use the verses and leave my opinion out of it, lets act like the book is factual and read what it says for content, not simply for support. I've done that, you've not.

I've sourced factual support for where I'm coming from, you've not. Multiple times you ignored verses in your comments that don't fit your stance, you've said chapters support your argument when the chapter in fact supports the opposite. Thats just on the biblical end.

You've yet to even address the factual historical side I've presented with respect to Protestantism.

I do not, not care what you have written. If I didn't I wouldn't have replied to you and would simply have dismissed you outright. I disagree with you and think your arguments and support are poor. Simple as that.
I say this as a person who isn't a christian by the way.

 

[Verbal Kint]

When you cite verses and claim they mean what you want or support what you want, instead of what the actual verses actually argue for and say, of course we'll come out on the opposite side. Which is why when I'm in these discussion about the bible I usually try to use the verses and leave my opinion out of it, lets act like the book is factual and read what it says for content, not simply for support. I've done that, you've not.

I've sourced factual support for where I'm coming from, you've not. Multiple times you ignored verses in your comments that don't fit your stance, you've said chapters support your argument when the chapter in fact supports the opposite. Thats just on the biblical end.

You've yet to even address the factual historical side I've presented with respect to Protestantism.

I do not, not care what you have written. If I didn't I wouldn't have replied to you and would simply have dismissed you outright. I disagree with you and think your arguments and support are poor. Simple as that.
I say this as a person who isn't a christian by the way.

You've been off base from the jump and continue to claim that I didn't support my argument simply because you don't agree with it. You're making claims that again, most people wouldn't agree with and don't understand the context of the verses you quote as well as you think you do. So I can post all the evidence in the world but you're not really trying to get to the bottom of this, you're trying to convince me that you're right and doing so with faulty logic. You've still never answered my original question to you about who should and shouldn't adhere to specific religions. So again, its pointless. A quick google search provides dozens of places directly refuting your claim and as the one with the opinion that goes against the grain, its your job to prove yourself right which you've failed to do. So again, there's no point in continuing this conversation. Peace to you

 

[David_TheMan]

You've been off base from the jump and continue to claim that I didn't support my argument simply because you don't agree with it. You're making claims that again, most people wouldn't agree with and don't understand the context of the verses you quote as well as you think you do. So I can post all the evidence in the world but you're not really trying to get to the bottom of this, you're trying to convince me that you're right and doing so with faulty logic. You've still never answered my original question to you about who should and shouldn't adhere to specific religions. So again, its pointless. A quick google search provides dozens of places directly refuting your claim and as the one with the opinion that goes against the grain, its your job to prove yourself right which you've failed to do. So again, there's no point in continuing this conversation. Peace to you

I would love for you to offer biblical support for the christian argument that I'm off base.
I would love for you to offer historical support for the protestant argument that I'm off base.
I've yet to see it.

I said you didn't support your argument because I actually looked and critiqued the verses you tried to use as support. I didn't personally attack you, I attacked the supposed source of your argument.

Like I said it seems you've gotten into your feelings, and your now making this about you or how you think I feel about you, isntead of just focusing on the actual argument. Thats cool, but I'm not interested in arguing your feelings or how you feel about me or how you think I feel about you.

If you can support what you are claiming great, I would love to see it. It seems you won't, so now you are trying to attack the messenger.

 

[Verbal Kint]

I would love for you to offer biblical support for the christian argument that I'm off base.
I would love for you to offer historical support for the protestant argument that I'm off base.
I've yet to see it.

I said you didn't support your argument because I actually looked and critiqued the verses you tried to use as support. I didn't personally attack you, I attacked the supposed source of your argument.

Like I said it seems you've gotten into your feelings, and your now making this about you or how you think I feel about you, isntead of just focusing on the actual argument. Thats cool, but I'm not interested in arguing your feelings or how you feel about me or how you think I feel about you.

If you can support what you are claiming great, I would love to see it. It seems you won't, so now you are trying to attack the messenger.

nikka what are you talking about? You the only one talking feelings and emotions. I haven't said a word about how I 'feel' about you nor have I taken anything you've said personally. We disagree and it ain't gonna change. You reject all evidence presented but then ask for more. Its stupid and unproductive and not in the least bit interesting at this point. You're acting like a college freshman feminist right now thinking you're dropping knowledge while not making any sense. Move on son

 

[David_TheMan]

nikka what are you talking about? You the only one talking feelings and emotions. I haven't said a word about how I 'feel' about you nor have I taken anything you've said personally. We disagree and it ain't gonna change. You reject all evidence presented but then ask for more. Its stupid and unproductive and not in the least bit interesting at this point. You're acting like a college freshman feminist right now thinking you're dropping knowledge while not making any sense. Move on son

Like I said in the post you just quoted, if you will actually post some evidence contrary to the evidence I posted biblically or historically to support your point I'm waiting.

 

[Verbal Kint]

Like I said in the post you just quoted, if you will actually post some evidence contrary to the evidence I posted biblically or historically to support your point I'm waiting.

Nah I'm done. But you ain't gotta wait on this neg