ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Offering Basket Sent Twice

Have you ever attended a church where, after the offerings have been taken, the pastor has said that the basket is being sent around again because not enough money had been given the first time?

If so, how did you react? If not, how do you think you will react if you ever see this happen?

Join Our Free Penpals and Take The False Gospels Bible Quiz
 ---Rita_H on 7/31/16
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



//You wrote: Name one?
God did not punish the rape of Dinah.//

Swapping roles and answers. I SAID THAT!

//horrible things were done, that God didn't punish, rather, allowed nature to take its course.//

Name one NATURE taking it's course?

Simeon and Levi punished the men for rapping Dinah, and neither GOD or NATURE punished them!

//He didn't punish the Romans feeding Christians to lions in the coliseum//

That isn't in the Bible SO you CAN'T believe Christians were fed to the lions. After all that's what the RCC claims.

//he allowed other nations to do terrible things, without personally smiting them - just as I said.---StrongAxe

Because Israel disobey God, not for having an army.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/26/16


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: Name one?

Uh, hello? The very one YOU mentioned. God did not punish the rape of Dinah. He did not punish the slaughter of all the males in her village. He didn't punish the Romans feeding Christians to lions in the coliseum. etc. etc.

No, God didn't want them to get lazy.

In other words, he allowed other nations to do terrible things, without personally smiting them - just as I said.
---StrongAxe on 8/26/16


//The Old Testament is full of incidents where horrible things were done, that God didn't punish, but rather, allowed nature to take its course.//

Oh no you don't.
Name one?

//Otherwise, Israel would never have needed an army, if God just smote all their enemies for them.---StrongAxe on 8/25/16

No, God didn't want them to get lazy.

He just didn't wants them to DEPEND on their own army.

God is the Victor!

A mother always allows her small child dress herself.
But she isn't going to allow her to leave the house dressed wrong. She corrects the child's clothes.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/26/16


So God didn't punish Simeon and Levi, but UNDERSTOOD their behavior because RAPE is WRONG!

The Old Testament is full of incidents where horrible things were done, that God didn't punish, but rather, allowed nature to take its course. So is the New Testament. You murder someone, all their kin will put a price on your head and chase you out of the land. No need for God to intervene further.

The world (whether you include God in it or not) is not inherently just. Many people have horrible things done to them and never see justice done in this life. People expect God to smite evildoers. It almost never happens. Otherwise, Israel would never have needed an army, if God just smote all their enemies for them.
---StrongAxe on 8/25/16


Yes - in violation of law and custom, and Daddy was NOT pleased. ---StrongAxe

Oh no! They were NOT punished. The Bible agrees with their response to Daddy

Daddy was not afraid of the Law (which wasn't around. I ask you mean against God)

Daddy wasn't afraid of God

Daddy was afraid of revenge from the Canaanites and the Perizzites.

Note the very next sentence: Gen 35:1

God Himself is telling Daddy to go to Betheel and speaks about Esau.

As to say to Jacob: 'You shouldn't worry about the Canaanites and Perizzites, but worry about ESAU instead!

So God didn't punish Simeon and Levi, but UNDERSTOOD their behavior because RAPE is WRONG!

DINAH isn't PROPERTY but made in the Image of God!
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/25/16




Nicole_Lacey:

I didn't complain. If you used more materials than the contract required, that's your problem, NOT mine.

A married woman sleeps with another man, both are stoned. A man sleeps with an unmarried woman, he is forced to marry her and/or pay the bride price. If he's already married, she becomes wife #2. No adultery there.

Dinah. Yes - because rape was a crime that devalued the value of the PROPERTY because she could no longer command a bride price. The remedy was marriage, where father DID receive his compensation. Leviticus is the same.

Simeon and Levi- Dinah's full brothers massacred all the males including Hamor and Shechem.

Yes - in violation of law and custom, and Daddy was NOT pleased.
---StrongAxe on 8/24/16


Called a 'walk through' before closing on the house.

Can't complain after moving in.

//Read OT marriage laws carefully. Laws about adultery,//
it's Stoning

//rape, compensation etc. treat women EXACTLY like property.---StrongAxe

No it doesn't. Some believe death should be the punishment in the OT.

Remember Dinah rape incident? Gen 34:1-31
V8 Father of Shechem suggested marriage

Simeon and Levi- Dinah's full brothers massacred all the males including Hamor and Shechem.

Trust me they wouldn't have killed the men OVER cattle or donkeys.

When asked 'Why' from their father they answered in Gen 34:31

But they retorted, "Should our sister have been treated like a HARLOT?"
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/24/16


Nicole_Lacey:

I asked for a 3 bedroom house. You generously built 2 rooms I didn't ask for. Thank you! You fulfilled your part of the bargain wonderfully. Now here is mine (payment for 3 rooms, as agreed).

Under your analogy, what if those two rooms were secret rooms not otherwise visible, that I only discovered long after I had moved in?

Both render the bride unsuitable merchandice. The bride price penalty was to compensate the father for no longer being able to sell the bride to another man (for money, 7 years, or whatever)

Read OT marriage laws carefully. Laws about adultery, rape, compensation etc. treat women EXACTLY like property. Jews today may not, but the OT does.
---StrongAxe on 8/23/16


Strongaxe, in the house building scenario you left out one important factor. Moving in.

With that action it proves I ACCEPTED your house.

Leah's innocence is irrelevant to contract law. She was the CHATTEL in the marriage contract. Her father committed fraud. If she is disadvantaged, she need to take it up with HIM.

//In their CUSTOMS, Leah CAN'T marry any one else!-Me
Under Leviticus, when a woman is so dishonored, She gets nothing, because she is considered property.---StrongAxe//

Speaks to RAPE not marriage consummation.
Gen 39:21 I never heard of a man telling a father he PLANS to rape his daughter.

Wrong. Jewish people NEVER treat their women as property.
Only Protestants.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/23/16


Nicole_Lacey:

If I build a 5 bedroom house, unless there are contract provisions for overages, you fulfil your half by accepting my work and paying me for a 3 bedroom house. It's my own fault for wasting my money and building a 5 bedroom house. If I build only 2 bedrooms, you have a right to refuse.

Leah's innocence is irrelevant to contract law. She was the CHATTEL in the marriage contract. Her father committed fraud. If she is disadvantaged, she need to take it up with HIM.

In their CUSTOMS, Leah CAN'T marry any one else!

Under Leviticus, when a woman is so dishonored, does the man pay her compensation? NO - he pays her owner - her father. She gets nothing, because she is considered property.
---StrongAxe on 8/23/16




Strongaxe, a contact is to make sure everyone is on the same page.

If I tell you to build me a 3 bedroom house and it's it in the contract. But you build a 5 bedroom house instead

I can't move INSIDE the house, and then refuse to pay the mortgage at the end of the month?

I have to complain and not move in the house.
Making the contract Null and Void because of your actions.

Strongaxe, Leah is a HUMAN Being. She isn't an object to be USED and TOSSED aside!
She is INNOCENT!
She can't help it if her father tricked Jacob. How do think she FEELS?

She also can't help it that Jacob was too lazy to even LOOK at her face before he took her virginity!

In their CUSTOMS, Leah CAN'T marry any one else!
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/22/16


Nicole_Lacey:

He didn't until he consummated the marriage.

Marriage contracts are ESTABLISHED before the marriage ceremony (if any) and the consummation. They are only finalized afterwards. Jacob had a contract with Laban where he would work for 7 years, and in return, would receive Rachel as a wife. There was no agreement at all for Leah - that was forced on him after the fact.

Stick to the fish and steak scenario.

Apples and oranges. She was wearing a veil. It's obvious he COULD have told the difference if he saw her face. Ergo, he COULDN'T see her face.
---StrongAxe on 8/22/16


Abraham getting a wife for Isaac Gen 24:4 but that you will go to MY OWN land and my KINDRED to get a wife for my son Isaac.

(Isaac telling Jacob) Gen 28:2 Go now to the home of your mother's father Bethuel, and there choose a wife for yourself from among the daughters of your UNCLE Laban.

//He HAD NO marriage contract with Leah.//

He didn't until he consummated the marriage.

If I go into your restaurant and order a gluten-free meal and you bring me one with gluten, I can't tell---StrongAxe

No comparison because you couldn't tell the difference even if your eyes were opened.

Stick to the fish and steak scenario.

They are as different as Leah and Rachel.
That is if one keeps his eyes opened.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/21/16


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: 1. Jacob should have waited until Leah was married. Then asked for Rachel.

He was in a foreign land. How could he reasonably have been expected to know its customs? Laban didn't inform him of them until AFTER he had violated it.

2. He could have legally gotten away from the marriage contract with Leah. How?

He HAD NO marriage contract with Leah. His marriage contract was for Rachel.

If I go into your restaurant and order a gluten-free meal and you bring me one with gluten, I can't tell - and when I get sick, you can bet the error is your fault. I can not only refuse to pay, I can sue.
---StrongAxe on 8/20/16


1. Jacob should have waited until Leah was married. Then asked for Rachel.

2. He could have legally gotten away from the marriage contract with Leah.
How?

By LOOKING at her face before consummating the marriage.

Strongaxe, if I go to your restaurant and order a steak dinner.
But you bring me a fish dinner instead.

I keep my eyes closed and eat the whole dinner. After eating it I notice a fish bone on my plate instead of a steak bone.
I can't REFUSE to pay the bill.

Before eating I should say 'Whoa, whoa, what's this? I ordered steak not fish. I am not paying!' I get up and leave.

Do you think you can call the police on me? No!

But if I ate the fish I have to pay for the fish.
Got it?
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/20/16


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: BTW, since you are so BIG on CUSTOMS what about Gen 30:26?

That was my WHOLE POINT of introducing this whole discussion. Custom was considered so important in that culture, that it superceded even negotiated contracts. Laban had deliberately tricked Jacob (i.e. committed fraud), and Jacob was right to complain, yet once Laban invoked custom, Jacob accepted the situation without further resistance.
---StrongAxe on 8/20/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


StrongAxe, it still didn't STOP him from removing the veil on their wedding night.

Logically, those women in veils were not seen prior to their marriage, right?

You are claiming there are men in the Middle East who consummate their marriage before looking at their faces. Not true, but lets say you are right.

It doesn't apply here. Jacob KNEW Laban tricked him because he has been looking at both faces for 7 YEARS!

There WASN'T anything stopping Jacob from looking at Leah's face except Jacob.

BTW, since you are so BIG on CUSTOMS what about Gen 30:26?
"it is not the CUSTOM in OUR Country, Laban (Jacob's uncle and his custom as well) replied, 'to marry off a younger daughter before an older one..."
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/19/16


Nicole_Lacey:

For more information, google: bridal veil tradition, or laban leah veil.

You wrote: StrongAxe, Nonsense. Name the Sect. After the marriage ceremony the man has the right to look at her face.

Today, we have religious ceremonies to solemnize marriages. In those days, the consummation solemnized a marriage. Otherwise, Jacob would have been married to Rachel FIRST, and only consummated with Leah after Laban made the switch.

Recently a man in Saudi Arabia asked for a divorce based on the bride being too ugly.

Laban 3000+ years ago was not a modern Muslim.
---StrongAxe on 8/19/16


StrongAxe, Nonsense. Name the Sect. After the marriage ceremony the man has the right to look at her face.

Because before the ceremony a woman ISN'T ALLOWED in a bed room alone with him.

How does she get into the bedroom ALONE to consummate the marriage?

Since the marriage isn't official until consummation, one can back out BEFORE

Recently a man in Saudi Arabia asked for a divorce based on the bride being too ugly.

He was DENIED because the courts said he had the OPPORTUNITY to LOOK at the bride before consummating the marriage.

His failure to do so WASN'T grounds for divorce.

True story. Google it.

BTW, Jacob being a Jew, went by Jewish culture's set of rules not by another.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/19/16


Nicole_Lacey:

Paul ONLY wrote 1-2 letters to a few congregations, addressing most pressing needs. He was not there for them on daily basis.

Wikipedia on Clerical Celibacy (Catholic Church):
Clerical celibacy is the discipline within the Catholic Church by which only unmarried men are ordained to the episcopate, to the priesthood (as a rule to which exceptions are sometimes made for individuals)...

Priests and bishops are REQUIRED to violate Paul's mandate (with a few exceptions) - directly CONTRADICTING the Bible in general.

It was the CUSTOM in the middle east for unmarried women to cover their faces. The marriage was not official until AFTER it was consummated - Jacpb didn't get to look at her face first.
---StrongAxe on 8/18/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


//Paul was an itinerant evangelist, NOT a congregational leader.//

Yet, he calls himself their Father gets happy when they behave themselves, or sad when they don't.
That's more than itinerant evangelist. They don't monitor people.

It is GOOD to abstain, not MANDATORY//
Wrong. There are some Married Priests in the RCC

The RCC follows the Bible, not have the Bible fit it's beliefs

..marrying the wrong woman was solely Laban's fault.---StrongAxe on 8/18/16

No it was Jacob FAULT for not looking at her. He had the right to look at her face before consummating the marriage. Most likely Jacob was suffering from lust.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/18/16


Nicole_Lacey:

Paul was an itinerant evangelist, NOT a congregational leader.

It is GOOD to abstain, not MANDATORY. He warned some would come in the last days forbidding marriage.

Paul said "A bishop MUST be blameless, the husband of one wife". He did not recommend marriage for pastors, he DEMANDED it. When you say anyone who wants married pastors to abuse their spouses and children, YOU accuse Paul of the very same thing.

I didn't Jacob could get rid of Leah. I said he didn't owe Laban 7 more years because he didn't contract for her, and any error involved (i.e. marrying the wrong woman) was solely Laban's fault.

My point was, Jacob ACCEPTED Laban's feeble "custom" excuse without objection.
---StrongAxe on 8/18/16


//Paul said a bishop (i.e. congratation leader) should be a man of one wife//

Yet, Paul DOESN'T take a wife himself and manages SEVERAL Churches without a wife.
Strange?

I guess he forgot what he wrote. 1 Cor 7:1
It is GOOD to abstain from sexual relations.

BOY, Paul is SO Confused! He said it is GOOD, not okay but good.

//We at least go by what Paul ACTUALLY SAID in scripture//

OBVIOUSLY NOT

You all want to abuse their spouses and children...

//So Paul demanded abusive leaders---StrongAxe

Nope, Paul ADVISED no marriage, but is one can't control themselves to get married to one person.

Hysterically sound as you all demanding married Pastors for FREE LABOR from their family.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/17/16


Strongaxe, your last response is odd.
You gave Jacob and his wives as a weak example.
I was knocking down your example.

Jacob CAN'T get rid of Leah because they consummated the marriage. Leah is a human being with rights.

//Jacob could have objected, but he didn't, because custom was paramount---StrongAxe

Jacob DID objected, but couldn't reject Leah because he consummated the marriage.- Nicole//

You are the one suggesting Jacob didn't objected not me. When I wrote that Jacob DID objected but had no choice.

Next you gave me Scripture backing my statement?

Gen 29:25: Jacob was given Leah, and complained he was tricked
26-27 Laban invoked custom
28 Jacob said nothing further, and accepted it.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/17/16


Send a Free Good Morning Ecard


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: So, a non married Priest can't tell a man NOT to FORCE his wife to work for FREE?

Paul said a bishop (i.e. congratation leader) should be a man of one wife, with a stable family - for the very specific reason that a man who can run his own family successfully has demonstrated the ability to run a congregation successfully too.

You all are SO brainwashed.

And you aren't? We at least go by what Paul ACTUALLY SAID in scripture, rather than going by a non-scriptural tradition that directly contradicts it.

You all want to abuse their spouses and children. ...

So Paul demanded abusive leaders. Can you not see just how hysterical that sounds?
---StrongAxe on 8/17/16


Nicole...Although I am married to the pastor I do not HAVE to do anything. Very few churches insist that the pastor's wife be their slave. We are very blessed to be pastoring a church with lots of volunteers. My husband and I believe in letting people use their God-given talents.

As far as being brainwashed, you can go confess to your priest and say a few Hail Marys. You could go directly to God like the Bible says when you want forgiveness.
---KarenD on 8/17/16


//They are taught to respect their wives by whom? A priest that cannot have a wife? How absurd.---KarenD on 8/17/16

So, a non married Priest can't tell a man NOT to FORCE his wife to work for FREE?

THAT'S ABSURD!

You all are SO brainwashed.

No wonder why you all WANT your Pastors to marry.

You all want to abuse their spouses and children.

You all should be ASHAMED OF YOURSELVES!!!

So those who don't own Slaves shouldn't tell others NOT to own Slaves?

Because I can't kill someone, I CAN'T tell another person NOT to KILL someone?

THAT'S ABSURD, Karen
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/17/16


Many wives prefer to be very involved in the church responsibilities...I am unpaid and enjoy every minute of serving my husband and the church.---KarenD

I agree. But you don't have to be married to the Pastor to voluntary in those duties you mentioned above.

I as well enjoy serving my Husband (Jesus) :D and His Church

Strongaxe is acting as if Pastor's Wives are exploited because they are forced.

I do believe this happens, but I blame the Pastors for not stopping the abuse.

No excuses for not protecting one's spouse.

You don't sound like you were forced to voluntary.

When we are asked over and over to take a voluntary survey at work until we do take the survey is renamed by us to 'Voluntold'.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/16/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


Nicole...They are taught to respect their wives by whom? A priest that cannot have a wife? How absurd.
---KarenD on 8/17/16


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: Jacob DID objected, but couldn't reject Leah because he consummated the marriage.

Gen 29:25: Jacob was given Leah, and complained he was tricked
26-27 Laban invoked custom
28 Jacob said nothing further, and accepted it.

He COULD have said, "You promised me Rachel for 7 years, and I still demand that payment. The fact that you gave me Leah without asking me is YOUR problem, NOT mine", and taken both of them, and been totally within his rights. But he didn't, because... custom.

To marry Rachel, he had to work another 7 years.

To quote Darth Vader: "I have altered the bargain. Pray I don't alter it any further".
---StrongAxe on 8/17/16


//Jacob contracted for one wife. Laban swindled him by giving him a different one, saying it is not the custom to marry the younger daughter first. Jacob could have objected, but he didn't, because custom was paramount---StrongAxe

Wrong.

Jacob DID objected, but couldn't reject Leah because he consummated the marriage.

She is a human being

To marry Rachel, he had to work another 7 years.

Again, there isn't ANY EXCUSES for Protestant Pastors to allow other people to abuse their wives!

Catholic men are taught to HONOR, PROTECT and RESPECT their wives.

I guess this is what happens after you all combined the 9th and 10th Commandments putting women/animals and goods on the same level.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/16/16


Many wives prefer to be very involved in the church responsibilities. I am the administrator of our church and counsel women when they ask. My two favorite duties are singing on worship team and teaching the children. We like to say I am the pastor's wife, girlfriend, and secretary. My husband is the spiritual head of our home and the church. He has a strong board helping him. I am unpaid and enjoy every minute of serving my husband and the church.
---KarenD on 8/16/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


//Jesus was explaining eunuchs, not servants of God//

No, Jesus was answering the Disciples who complained about NO DIVORCE COMMAND.

Acts 19:10-11 The disciples said to him, If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry. Jesus replied, NOT everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.

//He never said ALL servants of God MUST be eunuchs.//
All 3 TYPES covers ALL SERVANTS

//Does the RCC expect all their priests to be more pious than..Peter//

Celibacy doesn't make someone pious.
You are GREATLY mistaken!

//Why would a PASTOR ALLOW a Church to ABUSE his wife? Because it's part of the culture.---StrongAxe

So was slavery, your point?
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/16/16


Nicole_Lacey:

Jesus was explaining eunuchs, not servants of God - SOME were eunuchs for the kingdom. He never said ALL servants of God MUST be eunuchs. Does the RCC expect all their priests to be more pious than their own greatest Pope Peter, who had a mother-in-law, and thus must have been married?

Why would a PASTOR ALLOW a Church to ABUSE his wife?

Because it's part of the culture. Custom is very important. Jacob contracted for one wife. Laban swindled him by giving him a different one, saying it is not the custom to marry the younger daughter first. Jacob could have objected, but he didn't, because custom was paramount.
---StrongAxe on 8/16/16


Strongaxe, no VAGUE in-between the lines. Jesus is CLEAR why one doesn't take a wife. 3 different WAYS.

EXPLAIN the 3rd way if NOT an voluntary act for God.

//If a congregation demands free services from a pastor's wife she can either do them (and be exploited) or not...---StrongAxe

The hospital would LOVE IT if my twin sister would come in with me to clean the patient's room for free.

If they told me to bring her or I would be fired, I would tell them not to WASTE their time. I QUIT!

WHY would I work for a hospital that would abuse my sister?

Why would a PASTOR ALLOW a Church to ABUSE his wife?

His FIRST responsibility is to PROTECT his Wife.

He should NOT honor money more than his wife.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/16/16


Nicole_Lacey:

Some CHOOSE to live like eunuchs for the kingdom. Yet the church REQUIRES (not by choice) celibacy from ALL priests. This goes way beyond what Jesus said (like the Pharisees being much more strict than Moses), and contradicts what Paul explicitly said.

You should accept it.

I accept what Jesus SAID, but not the unspoken words your imagination reads between the lines.

No, she isn't exploited if she REFUSES to become a Pastor as her husband!

If a congregation demands free services from a pastor's wife, she can either do them (and be exploited) or not (and they will be dissatisfied and dump him for someone more pliable). How is this not coercion?
---StrongAxe on 8/16/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


//Yet, stopping priests from getting married directly contradicts Paul's command that "a bishop should be a man of one wife". Are you claiming that directly disobeying scripture is wise?

Nope, but FOLLOWING JESUS!

Matthew 19:12 and there are those who CHOOSE to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.- Jesus

You should accept it.


//If she's not paid, she's exploited. If she DOES have a paid position, some people will try "nepotism". You can't win.--StrongAxe

No, she isn't exploited if she REFUSES to become a Pastor as her husband!
Who is stopping her?
I seen many Churches with married Pastors!
Both are Pastors.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/15/16


The bible does, indeed, say that women are not to have authority over men but being ordained does not give women the authority which I think you mean.

Priests, vicars, ministers etc. are there to teach, give advice, counselling etc. but are not there to lay down the law and TELL people what they are to do.

If all clergy were to pray (seriously) with, and for, their members all their lives would be enhanced and very different. If a male is being counselled by a female that is not a woman having authority over a man, it is a woman offering advice (given to her by God himself) to help a male church member. Advice and orders are totally different. Women are just as capable of giving advice as are men without usurping authority.
---Rita_H on 8/14/16


Karen, the Bible also says that women are NOT to have authority over men, which they would were they ordained.
---Cluny on 8/14/16


Nicole...Actually I see NO wisdom in RCC whatsoever. The Bible clearly states that the pastor should have only one wife. Many pastor's wives are also ordained ministers. Guidance and counseling is part of many pastor's wives lives as they are usually Godly women who have a calling on their lives as well. God puts couples together for HIS purpose. Like I said, you cannot comprehend this since you are RCC.
---KarenD on 8/13/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: Karen, Rita and Strongaxe, you all NOW see the wisdom of the RCC in stopping Priests from getting married?

Yet, stopping priests from getting married directly contradicts Paul's command that "a bishop should be a man of one wife". Are you claiming that directly disobeying scripture is wise?

Advice? You can't tell me that the wife is the ONLY person in the Church to give advice.

No, but all to often, she's expected to be co-pastor, organist, and many other anciliary functions. If she's not paid, she's exploited. If she DOES have a paid position, some people will try "nepotism". You can't win.
---StrongAxe on 8/13/16


Karen, Rita and Strongaxe, you all NOW see the wisdom of the RCC in stopping Priests from getting married?

None of your answers answered my questions.

The wife isn't the Pastor!

Rita, I do comprehend. We have a similar problem in the RCC with married Deacons.
We reminded everyone that only the husband is ordained not the wife.
(If the wife dies the Deacon CANNOT remarry)

Advice? You can't tell me that the wife is the ONLY person in the Church to give advice.
I know there are other holy people in any Church capable of giving advice.

You all need to read Acts 6:2-4.

The Pastor needs to redirect the Church as Peter did above.
NO EXPLOITATION
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/13/16


Nicole...You do not understand the concept because you do not comprehend a pastor having a wife. Many wives are the musician, singer, bookkeeper, teacher, counselor, women's ministry leader, and taxi.
---KarenD on 8/13/16


Many churches do expect two for the price of one and do not wish to hire a bachelor or widower. They don't consider that some wives will have children to care for, a home to run, school activities to be involved in etc. If the pastor only is paid there is no money to pay for a housekeeper, cook, cleaner, nanny etc. for his family so the wife stays home and is all those things. Good. They are torn in all directions or they stand up for themselves and say "My husband is the pastor, not I." However, members really don't like that. They, almost always, think that they will get two for the price of one.
---Rita_H on 8/13/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: Why do Protestant Churches demand the same level of respect (other than you would give to any spouse) to a spouse of a Pastor as the Pastor?

Beause, like it or not, a pastor's wife is expected to serve in a secondary capacity - much like the First Lady has duties, even though they are not official, nor does she receive a salary for them.

What do you mean by 'Two for the price of one?

They pay for a pastor, but expect a co-pastor for free. People feel free to ask the pastor's wife for advice, and for help on other projects, etc. - things above and beyond what they would expect of any other church member.
---StrongAxe on 8/12/16


I you know their wives are usually unpaid. Two for the price of one.---KarenD

I am sorry, but why would the Church have to pay for their wives?

Unless they are Pastors for the same Church.

What if they like one Pastor and not the other?
Do they have to pay both Pastors anyway just because they are married?

We have many Doctors married to either other.
The hospital doesn't have to hire the spouse just because he or she is also a doctor.
Even more so if the spouse isn't a doctor.

Why do Protestant Churches demand the same level of respect (other than you would give to any spouse) to a spouse of a Pastor as the Pastor?

What do you mean by 'Two for the price of one?

Only one is the Pastor.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/12/16


Absolutely Karen. These are the churches with honest pastors, supportive wives and decent people as elders, deacons etc.

They behave the way they do because they love God and His Son Jesus and want the best for their members.

It's sad that any of these other churches ever came into being as they are misleading their members (giving the impression they will all become rich) and, in doing so, depriving them of hearing bible based sermons which could lead to them being truly saved.

God will not be mocked and WILL deal with these false pastors in His own way and time.
---Rita_H on 8/12/16


AG churches still hold annual meetings where the finances are present to the members. And if you calculate the salary of the pastor and their hours doing the church work outside the pulpit it usually adds up to less than minimum wage. And I you know their wives are usually unpaid. Two for the price of one.
---KarenD on 8/11/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


When people do leave I just pray that they'll find a new church where they'll receive a real blessing without all the fake promises..---Rita_H on 8/10/16

I agree. I am happy to say most of the families who left did find a 'Bible Base Church' (I believe that's how you all say it.)

And when I mean most I mean the children did as adults.

The parents died remaining in the Churches. (After all they are the ones who allowed the Pastors to behave in such manners.

But, the future of the Churches refused to worship in that manner.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/11/16


I attended an AofG church for a few years, and every year there was a financial meeting for all the members. Every year, almost every expense, every penny was scrutinized. Pastors salaries, the lease on vehicles, even the gas usage for the vehicles was questioned. I have never had so much fun in my life.

At the time, I was working at WQFL, an FM radio station that was owned by the church. Well, the church didnt pay disc jockeys anywhere near what they paid pastors. All the time I was there I got minimum wage.

However, I have never seen a pastor send the basket out twice to shame the congregation. I have seen traveling preachers do it but not the pastor.
---Monk_Brendan on 8/11/16


Yes Nicole, I too am very pleased to hear that congregations fall in number when they have a corrupt pastor. This will be the incentive for members (who have a vote) to say it's time we had a new pastor.

For those churches owned by the pastor (and being run as a family business - and it's amazing just how many of those there are now) they deserve to be deserted by all members who are not family.

When people do leave I just pray that they'll find a new church where they'll receive a real blessing without all the fake promises (which always seem to be based on how much you place in the box or on the plate. It's total corruption.
---Rita_H on 8/10/16


Sorry, StrongAxe, I didn't mean you when I wrote that statement.

When have I ever judged you for putting $1 in the collection plate?---StrongAxe

I meant in general as far as a Pastor resending the collection plate, or announcing everyone's offering in order to shame some to give more.

I understand why you believed I was accusing you because I didn't make it clear.
You personally would have not known how much I was giving to God unless I tell you.

I am glad when those Pastor's congregation dropped, because they couldn't force people to give more than they had given.

It ISN'T misfortune when God STOPS you from mistreating others as He did with those Pastors at my grandparent's Churches.

SORRY AGAIN
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/8/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: If I put $1 in the collection plate, DON'T Judge me.

When have I ever judged you for putting $1 in the collection plate?
---StrongAxe on 8/8/16


StrongAxe, God doesn't like anyone to MISLED His children.

When that evil man Castro was arrested and the 3 ladies and one child finally were free. EVERYONE rejoiced because they were free and he was locked up.
His misfortune, but deserved!

God doesn't want us to rejoice over daily misfortunes of others, but evil people hurting others is another matter.

The Pastor was embarrassing God's children to steal their monies.

If I put $1 in the collection plate, DON'T Judge me.

Remember what Jesus said about the poor woman's offering.

God is the One who decreased the Pastor's Church because of his abuse.
Punishment, not misfortune!
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/8/16


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: Called out the name with title Brother or Sister saying: Brother Cecil (my grandfather) gave $20...

I guess their bibles didn't have the verse about "let your giving be done in secret".

My mother said that's how they make sure every cent is accounted and credited to the right person.

That is fine, but it can be done privately.

I am happy to say both Churches' membership today is down to 5 people and less each.

We should not rejoice in other people's misfortunes, no matter how richly deserved. In German, this is called schadenfreude, and although it can be extremely satisfying, it's not a Christian virtue.
---StrongAxe on 8/7/16


Yes, and I was angry. BTW I was only 9 yrs. old at the time. (1980 with 50 families each)

But, it gets worst. At my grandparents Churches (They went to two separate Baptists Churches) They announced each person's donation.

Called out the name with title Brother or Sister saying: Brother Cecil (my grandfather) gave $20...

I couldn't believe it!

My mother said that's how they make sure every cent is accounted and credited to the right person.

I am happy to say both Churches' membership today is down to 5 people and less each.

God doesn't like bullies.

He said He loves a HAPPY Giver not a Forced giver or shamed giver.
---Nicole_Lacey on 8/6/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Marketing


Karen, thank you. That is really good to know.
---Rita_H on 8/5/16


Someone has to pay for their multi-million dollar mansions, and high price vehicles.
---Rob on 8/4/16


When we have an evangelistic service we have the ushers stand at the exit with the offering bags for those who want to pay an additional offering to the evangelist since some people come in after the offering is taken. The one evangelist whom we do have preach at the church is full-time on the evangelistic field and depends totally on offerings. His lifestyle also measures up to holiness living.
---KarenD on 8/4/16


aservant:

Levites were special because of who they WERE, not what they DID. Forbidden from owning land, they got tithes to support them. Church workers are not forbidden from owning property or having outside income. Except in large churches, pastoring is only a part-time job.

Jn 6:63 says nothing about levites.

Levites received TITHES, not offerings.

Phil 4

Paul received offerings, NOT tithes.

1 Cor 9.

A portion of the upkeep of the church, NOT tithes.

Num 18:23

Jews must still tithe to Levi. We are not Jews. Church workers are not Levi.

Mal 3:8-10

OT, not NT, so not "still".

Heb 7:8

See Heb 7:12,18,22.
---StrongAxe on 8/3/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Life Insurance


Church workers aren't levites. They . . . own land and have other sources of income. Paul was a tent maker! ---StrongAxe on 8/1/16

Just as Christians are Spiritual Jews - Rom 2:28-29, church workers are Spiritual Levites.

God operates in the Spiritual. The Spiritual principle can never be limited to Levite flesh - Jn 6:63.

The Spiritual purpose of ALL offerings is worshiping God.

Today's church workers are forced to work outside because leaders are stealing their tithes (i.e., inheritance).

Paul also received tithes and offerings - Phil 4, 1 Cor 9.
---aservant on 8/3/16


Since we no longer have a levite class . . . the law of tithing to support the levites does not apply to us.
---StrongAxe on 8/1/16


Not true -> Num 18:23 . . . it shall be a statute for ever . . .

Not a statute until the Levi Tribe is extinct, but forever.

God is still requiring tithes and offerings - Mal 3:8-10

Heb 7:8 And here men (not Levites) that die receive (present tense) tithes, but there he receiveth (present tense) them

Jesus (Melchisedec) is still receiving tithes and offerings, used to worship our Father, and He was not born from the Levi tribe.
---aservant on 8/3/16


\\A fuller explanation of that second collection which was cash.\\

I understood what y ou were talking about, Rita.

But I was referring to Orthodox practice.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 8/3/16


A fuller explanation of that second collection which was cash... the containers were returned to the minister who looked into them carefully then announced that there was not enough money so they were going to be taken around again, immediately, for more to be added. Many felt that was greed.

In U.K. I and some others have blank envelopes. Those with numbered ones are using a system whereby the tax dept. returns their tax payment to charities. The individual does not get the tax back. I and several others are not tax payers nor do we wish to be identified, hence the anonymous envelopes.
---Rita_H on 8/2/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


A note about second special collections: usually they are announced at least a week in advance, if not from the pulpit then in the bulletin.
---Cluny on 8/2/16


Rita_H:

Before resorting to that drastic measure, perhaps they should first demand accountability. Churches are generally non-profit organizations, so donations to them are tax deductible. When people donate, they usually use envelopes so the church treasurer can keep track of donations from each parishioner and issue them a receipt for tax purposes. An audit should reveal just where the money is going (and if fraud is being committed). If the treasurer will not submit to an audit, he should be removed, and an independent audit be forced (and perhaps criminal charges pressed, if deliberate embezzlement detected).
---StrongAxe on 8/2/16


The church I had in mind when I asked this has a pastor who lives in a mansion and has much wealth. His congregation drive old cars whilst he has several very grand ones.

It would seem that the offerings are being misused by one family and, maybe, the congregation now give less than before or maybe just won't be bullied into giving more that they can afford.

My feeling is that all members should find a new church - one with a collection box into which no-one can see and it should be counted when the service is over.
---Rita_H on 8/1/16


aservant:

You wrote: I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance

Most churches have been stealing from the church workers for years.

How many workers in your church (or any other church you know) are from the tribe of Levi?

Levi was specifically set aside. All the other tribes got their share of the promised land, but they didn't get a share. Instead, they got 1/10 of the income from the other tribes.

Church workers aren't levites. They are allowed to own land and have other sources of income. Paul was a tent maker! Since we no longer have a levite class in the church, the law of tithing to support the levites does not apply to us.
---StrongAxe on 8/1/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


///...Starting a church...is not something to be undertaken lightly.---StrongAxe on 8/1/16///

"Axe: I hear & understand what you're saying. All I'm saying is if it's meant to be (is God's plan), God will make a way for it to happen & be sustained. A lot of preachers put grievous financial burdens on their congregations in order to actualize their (not God's) vision. Therein lies the problem...
---Leon on 8/1/16


The true church of God does not need buildings. It doesn't need money to pay for mortgages, rent, or pay for the upkeep of these and other assets. It doesn't need money to pay for wages. It does not need money for marketing or creating programs for the "church."

If you truly want to find where the money comes from and where it goes do not use the denominational "church's" financial statements or the year tax return. Go directly to IRS Form 990 for that particular charity/church. It goes into complete detail where the money comes from and where it goes.
---Steveng on 8/1/16


Leon:

Starting a church (as a financial corporate entity, owning or renting land, and with assets, etc.) is not something to be undertaken lightly. Once that decision has been made, undoing it is something that can't be done lightly either. If a church has been around for a long time, and is working to pay off a mortgage, and the collection just happens to comes up short one week, the pastor can't just say, "Well, that's all folks", and pack up and go back to having church in his living room - just as most people won't give up their homes and go live on the street if their home finances come up a few dollars short one month. One usually tightens a few belts first.
---StrongAxe on 8/1/16


Num 18:21 And, behold, I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve,

Num 18:24 But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit:


Most churches have been stealing from the church workers for years. God set aside (ordained) the tithe (tenth) to be given to the church workers forever (inheritance). God NEVER intended the tithe to be used to pay bills. Various offerings were intended to support organizational needs.
---aservant on 8/1/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


Perhaps if the first isn't enough the Deacons need to keep an eye on where the money goes. There are some crooked Pastors who are more of the world than of who they are supposed to be serving.
---Darlene_1 on 8/1/16


For pastors who feel they haven't gotten enough offering money to pay the church mortgage, utilities & meet ministry needs, etc.: Instead of shaking down the congregants, perhaps certain pastors need to back up to the point of a home Bible study until such a time as God validates & provides resources that'll contribute to the expansion of their calling (IF they are indeed called of God). Many aren't & are in ministry only for personal recognition & profits...
---Leon on 7/31/16


That I have not seen (thought it would not surprise me).

Sometimes in some churches there is a second collection designated for a particular purpose.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/31/16


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.