Let's compare Jesus and Muhammed (and debate homosexuality) (and Tombstone).

#376
#376
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Religion is of man. Jesus made this point many times and voiced his displeasure with "religion".
Click to expand...

"Religion" and/or "Religious" in the New Testament:


2 Tim 3
1
But understand this: there will be terrifying times in the last days.
2
People will be self-centered and lovers of money, proud, haughty, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, irreligious,
3
callous, implacable, slanderous, licentious, brutal, hating what is good,
4
traitors, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God,
5
as they make a pretense of religion but deny its power. Reject them.

1 Tim 6

1 Those who are under the yoke of slavery must regard their masters as worthy of full respect, so that the name of God and our teaching may not suffer abuse.
2
Those whose masters are believers must not take advantage of them because they are brothers but must give better service because those who will profit from their work are believers and are beloved.
3
Whoever teaches something different and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the religious teaching
4
is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid disposition for arguments and verbal disputes. From these come envy, rivalry, insults, evil suspicions,
5
and mutual friction among people with corrupted minds, who are deprived of the truth, supposing religion to be a means of gain.
6
Indeed, religion with contentment is a great gain.
Click to expand...
 
#377
#377
...Continued

Acts 26
1
Then Agrippa said to Paul, "You may now speak on your own behalf." So Paul stretched out his hand and began his defense.
2
"I count myself fortunate, King Agrippa, that I am to defend myself before you today against all the charges made against me by the Jews,
3
especially since you are an expert in all the Jewish customs and controversies. And therefore I beg you to listen patiently.
4
My manner of living from my youth, a life spent from the beginning among my people and in Jerusalem, all (the) Jews know.
5
They have known about me from the start, if they are willing to testify, that I have lived my life as a Pharisee, the strictest party of our religion.

Titus 1

1 Paul, a slave of God and apostle of Jesus Christ for the sake of the faith of God's chosen ones and the recognition of religious truth,
2
in the hope of eternal life that God, who does not lie, promised before time began,
3
who indeed at the proper time revealed his word in the proclamation with which I was entrusted by the command of God our savior,
4
to Titus, my true child in our common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our savior

James 1
26
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, his religion is vain.
27
Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their affliction and to keep oneself unstained by the world.
Click to expand...
 
#379
#379
bamacheats said:
Not really. Passing a collection plate, for example, obligates people to donate out of fear of embarrassment. Megachurches are even collecting tax returns so they can estimate what amount should be tithed. That's a tax. A tax with no dividends. At least government provides a service.

People can have a church in their living room, their backyard, or even a community church. But my point is not about worship, its about megachurches. Eventually they will fall. Study Europe, as taxes went up, church membership went down. The same is already happening here. The south is about the only part left where church is a staple of life.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I would suggest they find a different church
 
#380
#380
bamacheats said:
Let's compare the Vatican's contributions in each of those areas against the U.S.'s contributions. Membership and citizenship numbers are close enough.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

In that case, let's also look at the Vatican's income: ~$200M.

What you fail to understand is that the Vatican takes very little off the top from individual archdiocese. Archbishops and bishops are the ones who make the majority of the decisions about how to spend the money that is tithed in their communities.

This is why bishops and priests from Africa and India will visit American parishes and ask for a separate donation.

However, to imply in any way that the Vatican falls short on their mission by comparing population numbers is absolutely ridiculous. Off the top of my head, I would argue that more than half of all Catholics live in undeveloped or developing nations. This would mean that in "tax receipts" alone, the comparison would heavily favor the US population.

The Roman Catholic Church and its members have spent a great deal of money over the years on humanitarian projects.

Maybe its time you put down the Hitchens (over half of Hitchens citations are to Hecht) and Hecht (had to pull Doubt off the market a few months after its initial release to correct the immense amount of historical and factual errors...then, she did not even note that the republished version was a 2nd Edition) books.
 
#382
#382
VolsNSkinsFan said:
Feed/clothe/shelter the poor Hospitals to care for the sick. Hospices to care for the dying. Nursing homes to care for the elderly, day care centers to care for the young. Care for those with substance abuse problems and mental illnesses and special needs All types of schools These are all done at home and in third world. They work with third world governments to help bring in basic necessities like clean water and toilets. They respond to natural disasters etc etc
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

All of these are also used to indoctrinate the people they're helping. Example, Bibles are delivered with food and water during natural disaster relief. They're free to do this, but that's not efficiently helping anyone. These services would exist without churches.
 
Last edited:
#383
#383
therealUT said:
There is a fundamental difference between tithing and being taxed.

You can make the argument that church goers are coerced into their tithes: if they truly believe in their canon, then can they refuse to give and avoid damnation; however, if they truly believe, then they are not "deciding" to support anything. If they do not truly believe, then the threat of damnation is not strong enough to be coercion.

As for government taxes, the failure to pay the required amount leads directly to tangible punitive measures; it is coercion. The only way to "decide" not to pay is to either decide to revolt or decide it is better to spend time in jail.
Click to expand...

Your second paragraph is nearly indiscernable.

"Refuse to give and avoid damnation", "not deciding anything", the threat of damnation is not a sufficiently strong coercive force, et al.

Perhaps your zealotry prevents my understanding of what it is that you are attempting to explain or state - or more likely, perhaps I am just too ignorant to grasp it.

Can you help me out by clarifying your remarks?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#384
#384
VolsNSkinsFan said:
Feed/clothe/shelter the poor Hospitals to care for the sick. Hospices to care for the dying. Nursing homes to care for the elderly, day care centers to care for the young. Care for those with substance abuse problems and mental illnesses and special needs All types of schools These are all done at home and in third world. They work with third world governments to help bring in basic necessities like clean water and toilets. They respond to natural disasters etc etc
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Nothing you describe is unique to either any church or religious sect, alone.

Are there not atheists who do the same?

How to differentiate the two?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#385
#385
bamacheats said:
Not really. Passing a collection plate, for example, obligates people to donate out of fear of embarrassment. Megachurches are even collecting tax returns so they can estimate what amount should be tithed. That's a tax. A tax with no dividends. At least government provides a service.

People can have a church in their living room, their backyard, or even a community church. But my point is not about worship, its about megachurches. Eventually they will fall. Study Europe, as taxes went up, church membership went down. The same is already happening here. The south is about the only part left where church is a staple of life.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

A tax without dividends, or without producing dividends which you personally value? What does it matter one whit to you if believers tithe their money to a church, of any size - or elsewhere, for that matter.

Would you be willing to reciprocate the same, and allow believers to question and deride your spending habits? If not, then how can you reasonably seek the same?

This is the second time or so (iirc) that you've said something specifically against a formal (brick and mortar) church setting - or encouraging the use of homes, etc. What point are you attempting make in saying those things - and what's (seemingly) wrong with believers congregating in a "formal" church setting?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#386
#386
bamacheats said:
Plenty of evidence to suggest that's exactly what's currently happening.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Your are right. If the people don't like what "preacher bobs church" is saying then they drive down the street to "preacher dans church". Or if "preacher Jims church" got a new gym and the kids like to play there, we will just go to that church.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#387
#387
Tenacious D said:
Nothing you describe is unique to either any church or religious sect, alone.

Are there not atheists who do the same?

How to differentiate the two?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Sure the red cross and the UN and other charities do great work all over the world. But they havent been doing it for 2000 years
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#388
#388
Tenacious D said:
Your second paragraph is nearly indiscernable.

"Refuse to give and avoid damnation", "not deciding anything", the threat of damnation is not a sufficiently strong coercive force, et al.

Perhaps your zealotry prevents my understanding of what it is that you are attempting to explain or state - or more likely, perhaps I am just too ignorant to grasp it.

Can you help me out by clarifying your remarks?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I agree that "the threat of damnation" is not a sufficiently coercive force. I am certainly not a believer; I am an agnostic.

I was making the point that taxes are coercive, tithes are not.

To bolster the argument against Bamacheats, I would also add that "shame" is not a sufficiently coercive force, either.
 
#389
#389
VOLatile said:
All of these are also used to indoctrinate the people they're helping. Example, Bibles are delivered with food and water during natural disaster relief. They're free to do this, but that's not efficiently helping anyone. These services would exist without churches.
Click to expand...

The Biblical text impugns efficiency? Did not know that. Must explain why hotel maid service takes until 1pm.

If these services would be otherwise supplied - then why haven't these other secular organizations first met the need (especially not being encumbered with all those Bibles and all) themselves, and thus precluded the churches from ever needing to do so? Or, why don't those whom they are seeking to help simply refuse their offering, altogether, with all of their Bibles and what not?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#390
#390
bamacheats said:
Not really. Passing a collection plate, for example, obligates people to donate out of fear of embarrassment. Megachurches are even collecting tax returns so they can estimate what amount should be tithed. That's a tax. A tax with no dividends. At least government provides a service.

People can have a church in their living room, their backyard, or even a community church. But my point is not about worship, its about megachurches. Eventually they will fall. Study Europe, as taxes went up, church membership went down. The same is already happening here. The south is about the only part left where church is a staple of life.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Then why is it that typically only 20% of members tithe regularly? 80% of the members aren't afraid so the fear isn't working.

I do agree that churches, for the most part, have lost their way. However what institution exists that humans don't corrupt or abuse?
 
#391
#391
JZVOL said:
Then why is it that typically only 20% of members tithe regularly? 80% of the members aren't afraid so the fear isn't working.

I do agree that churches, for the most part, have lost their way. However what institution exists that humans don't corrupt or abuse?
Click to expand...

i'd be willing to bet only 20% of members attend church regurarly. are you saying that of the people who show up only 20% give money?
 
#392
#392
VolsNSkinsFan said:
Sure the red cross and the UN and other charities do great work all over the world. But they havent been doing it for 2000 years
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

So, its the length of time, alone?

But now that these other services are in place, and (as some would argue) are meeting these needs both more sufficiently and efficiently, why doesn't the church simply stop doing so? If its as unimportant and insignificant as some allege, I doubt that anyone would notice. Right?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#393
#393
therealUT said:
I agree that "the threat of damnation" is not a sufficiently coercive force. I am certainly not a believer; I am an agnostic.

I was making the point that taxes are coercive, tithes are not.

To bolster the argument against Bamacheats, I would also add that "shame" is not a sufficiently coercive force, either.
Click to expand...

If it was a sufficient method, on average more than 20% of the congregation would tithe regularly.

I "earmark" my tithe to missions or other projects that help people, not building campaigns etc.
 
#394
#394
What kind of missions does your church do? I'm just curious. I've been to churches that send large groups to build shelters and to ones that just send their missionaries to preach the gospel (what my uncle was sent to do last summer). The former is perfectly fine, the latter is sad. Not sure what the usual mission consists of.
 
Last edited:
#395
#395
Tenacious D said:
A tax without dividends, or without producing dividends which you personally value? What does it matter one whit to you if believers tithe their money to a church, of any size - or elsewhere, for that matter.

Would you be willing to reciprocate the same, and allow believers to question and deride your spending habits? If not, then how can you reasonably seek the same?

This is the second time or so (iirc) that you've said something specifically against a formal (brick and mortar) church setting - or encouraging the use of homes, etc. What point are you attempting make in saying those things - and what's (seemingly) wrong with believers congregating in a "formal" church setting?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It's none of my business what someone else does with their money and I've never suggested otherwise. However, when its done under obligation its a tax.

My point is about megachurces, they can't survive. Small community churches are not in that group.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#396
#396
droski said:
i'd be willing to bet only 20% of members attend church regurarly. are you saying that of the people who show up only 20% give money?
Click to expand...

Good question. I used to have that information (I've got it somewhere) but can't remember off the top of my head.

Either way if only 20% of members show up regularly that fear of embarrassment still is not working.
 
#397
#397
JZVOL said:
If it was a sufficient method, on average more than 20% of the congregation would tithe regularly.

I "earmark" my tithe to missions or other projects that help people, not building campaigns etc.
Click to expand...

That sounds like charitable donations (nothing wrong with that) - more than tithing. At least to me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#399
#399
Tenacious D said:
That sounds like charitable donations (nothing wrong with that) - more than tithing. At least to me.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

It still goes to the churches "mission" budget to fund trips. I would just rather see it go there than to help get a flat screen for the kids to watch Veggie Tales in HD.
 
#400
#400
bamacheats said:
It's none of my business what someone else does with their money and I've never suggested otherwise. However, when its done under obligation its a tax.

My point is about megachurces, they can't survive. Small community churches are not in that group.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

You should see the newest megachurch here. They tore down an entire low income neighborhood to build it and it's packed to the brim every Sunday when I drive by it.

Personally, if I went to church I'd prefer a more personal relationship with my pastor rather than just be one of the crowd at a megachurch.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top