When Money Comes Into Religion...

[gnomon]

Ah, now there is the rub. The need. Religious congregations have never satisfactorily proven that GOD requires worship or a place of worship, (though many religious primitives would have us believe that this is a necessity for the people). The need seems to be the Truth that there are other people who are more needy. It would seem beneficial for all religions to turn this faith into recognizing the Truth that there are people who are hungry, there are people impoverished and there are people who are sick and that this need should be their first (top) priority.

With the money spent on supporting these buildings, I am sure that these funds are being distracted from the real problems of our society. I wouldn’t even mind it if the donations and funds were being used to research and develop their beliefs or used successfully to conclude the Truths or Untruths about their belief systems. Instead they are used to preserve and secure faith and like I mentioned previously, faith is expensive and there is no money back guarantee on faith and all these religions cannot be correct in their understanding and practice of worshipping a deity. In the face of more pressing concerns, I would suggest putting pride and faith aside and committing these funds to permanently (and prominently) addressing our world's concerns.

Since when is it the goal of religion to do that? There are numerous reasons why religions exist. If they do no match your version of Truth seeking then they should abandon their attempts. Vacuous.

This shows an extraordinary lack of understanding of religion in general. Put your own pride and faith aside first.

 

[cardero]

Gnoman writes: Since when is it the goal of religion to do that? There are numerous reasons why religions exist.

What do you feel is the goal of religion and why do you feel the need for money to be introduced into this concept?

Gnoman writes: If they do no match your version of Truth seeking then they should abandon their attempts. Vacuous.

I’m not sure what Truth seeking methods would incur any religion to become a multi-million dollar industry.

Gnoman writes: This shows an extraordinary lack of understanding of religion in general.

My understanding of religion is that both beliefs and GOD are free. Some religions lose focus of this and handle their organizations like a business, which, to some degree, they are. If one wants to promote those beliefs, one is going to need followers, if one accumulates enough followers, one is going to need a place to meet, if one wants to keep this meeting place, one is going to have to acquire donations. No public, no donations, no donations, no place for your congregation to meet. One of the hardest jobs of a religious leader is convincing someone else to come to their place of worship rather than another.

Gnoman writes: Put your own pride and faith aside first.

I do not remember promoting any pride or faith.

 

[ChristineES]

The pastors of Churches aren't always paid that much. Every pastor I ever had had to work at a regular job as well as being a pastor. Then again, I prefer smaller, more intimate places of congregation.

 

[cardero]

The pastors of Churches aren't always paid that much. Every pastor I ever had had to work at a regular job as well as being a pastor. Then again, I prefer smaller, more intimate places of congregation.

As a minister, I do not expect or request any money for my ministry either. I understand that GOD is penniless and that kindness can be an opening of one’s heart, not necessarily of one’s wallet.

 

[gnomon]

What do you feel is the goal of religion and why do you feel the need for money to be introduced into this concept?

It is many. I do not assert that the goal of religion is to feed the hungry of the world or clothe the poor. To believe so shows a tremendous lack of understanding of the history of world religions.

I’m not sure what Truth seeking methods would incur any religion to become a multi-million dollar industry.

A generalization and pointless.

My understanding of religion is that both beliefs and GOD are free. Some religions lose focus of this and handle their organizations like a business, which, to some degree, they are. If one wants to promote those beliefs, one is going to need followers, if one accumulates enough followers, one is going to need a place to meet, if one wants to keep this meeting place, one is going to have to acquire donations. No public, no donations, no donations, no place for your congregation to meet. One of the hardest jobs of a religious leader is convincing someone else to come to their place of worship rather than another.

Congratulations. Which religions are these or is your assertion the Truth. I won't hold my breath.

I do not remember promoting any pride or faith.

Read your posts.

edit: Pardon me if I so rudely interrupted this latest circle jerk of what amounts to Christian bashing. By all means, continue.

 

[gnomon]

How should it be spent?

Is it wasted?

Well, sometimes i think it is wasted. Look at Hinduism, they spend millions on buying diamonds, that can be used for SO many better things.

Am i right or wrong?

Thanks in Advance!

Simply put, it is right and wrong.

Money is a necessity. If it wasn't money then it would be another resource. For whatever means any particular religion must use money or other resources in the exercise of their rituals and the practice of their faith. Excepting those who hold to their own personal religion in which they get to sit in their room and cast disdain towards millions for not living up to their standard of ... "Truth".

In the name of religion or not, their is common agreement that greed is bad. While those relatively few who are spotlighted give the appearance of hypocrisy it must be remembered that they are not the religion or even representatives of the religion. To paint them as such is irrational. It may also seem irrational to focus on say the uselessness of money in a religious belief while ignoring the heavy excess of wealth in say, certain parts of Los Angeles County, museums or any publicly funded art project. Or for that matter, any resource consuming project which serves no practical function.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

Money is a neccesity, but sometimes is just there, sometimes it is just WASTED. Most religions are great at wasting money.

 

[gnomon]

Money is a neccesity, but sometimes is just there, sometimes it is just WASTED. Most religions are great at wasting money.

What leads you to this conclusion.

On a side note: How is it a religion does anything?

 

[Don Penguinoini]

I have no clue what you mean.

 

[gnomon]

I have no clue what you mean.

Most religions are great at wasting money.

How? Christianity is not a business. Neither is Islam or Hinduism, for example. How do they waste money. They are not businesses. They have no governing body. These three include approximately 2/3 of the world's population. They span every continent. How do you know that just these three religions waste money?

 

[cardero]

edit: Pardon me if I so rudely interrupted this latest circle jerk of what amounts to Christian bashing. By all means, continue.

It's really very simple gnomon. Try this test and see how well you do (HINT: It doesn't matter what religious denomination you are).

EXAMPLE 1

FAITH?

OR TRUTH?

EXAMPLE 2.

BETTER A?

OR BETTER B?

EXAMPLE 3.


Would You Rather Believe This To Be True?

Or Know This To Be True?

Matthew 25:35 For I became hungry and YOU gave me something to eat; I got thirsty and YOU gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and YOU received me hospitably; 36 naked, and YOU clothed me. I fell sick and YOU looked after me. I was in prison and YOU came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous ones will answer him with the words, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty, and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and receive you hospitably, or naked, and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to you?’ 40 And in reply the king will say to them, ‘Truly I say to YOU, To the extent that YOU did it to one of the least of these my brothers, YOU did it to me.’

 

[Smoke]

The pastors of Churches aren't always paid that much. Every pastor I ever had had to work at a regular job as well as being a pastor. Then again, I prefer smaller, more intimate places of congregation.

Some of the best clergy I've ever known -- well, no, the best, period -- haven't been paid a thing, and made their living at secular pursuits.

I'm always a little leery of what George Fox calls hirelings, and although sojourner and angellous have convinced me they're not all bad, I still think that if one could be said to have a spiritual calling or spiritual gifts, it would be in the worst possible taste to charge for them.

 

[Draka]

gnomon, what is up with the references to "Truth" all the time? What does that have to do with any of this? You say that religion is not a business. Okay, while having beliefs is not a business, the propogating of those beliefs to others ...IS. Churches, Synogogs, Temples, what-have-you, ARE in business, no matter what their darn tax-exempt status may say. There is a place of business, employees, raising of money, and, yes, a product or service being offered. You might not want to see it that way, but too dang bad.

And, from what I can tell, this is not a "Christian bashing" thread. Especially since the originator of the thread made comments directly pointing at Hinduism in the first place. I love that if anyone criticizes anything Christians do, even in the midst of criticizing others, we're all guilty of "Christian bashing". Some people seem to have a persecution complex.

 

[Katzpur]

It's really very simple gnomon. Try this test and see how well you do (HINT: It doesn't matter what religious denomination you are).

EXAMPLE 2.

BETTER A?

OR BETTER B?

I'm not sure why you see A and B as mutually exclusive. There is no reason in the world why both cannot exist side by side. Actually, they do.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

How? Christianity is not a business. Neither is Islam or Hinduism, for example. How do they waste money. They are not businesses. They have no governing body. These three include approximately 2/3 of the world's population. They span every continent. How do you know that just these three religions waste money?

First of sll, you have completely misunderstood the OP. I never even mentioned the word business. I clearly stated, wasting mo ney. Do you think HUGE mosques, HUGE churches, HUGE mandirs are needed. That money can be used for a lot better.

Re-read the OP.

EDIT: I never really, exclusively noted those 3 religions.

 

[cardero]

I'm not sure why you see A and B as mutually exclusive. There is no reason in the world why both cannot exist side by side. Actually, they do.

I would ask the same of religions. Are not most religions supposed to be in the service of GOD? Why do some religious organizations feel that they have to franchise GOD or offer numerous brands with only slight belief differences? Why do some religions only look out and provide for their own members? Are we not all human? What kind of service is GOD getting for this money? Is it lip service? Is it ritual service or Is it service to humankind in need?

 

[Don Penguinoini]

We are not taling in general BTW. The subject remains exclusively in religion.

 

[Katzpur]

I would ask the same of religions. Are not most religions supposed to be in the service of GOD?

I believe most Abrahamic religions are.

Why do some religious organizations feel that they have to franchise GOD or offer numerous brands with only slight belief differences?

Sorry, Patarick, I didn't understand the question.

Why do some religions only look out and provide for their own members?

I don't know, but the one represented by the Salt Lake Temple provides for people all over the world, without expecting anything in return.

Are we not all human?

I believe we are.

What kind of service is GOD getting for this money?

Well, I can only speak concerning the money that is contributed to the LDS Church. The Book of Mormon says, "When ye are in the service of your fellow beings, ye are only in the service of your God." We look at service to any of God children (and that doesn't mean only His LDS children, only His Christian children, only His Abrahamic children or only he theist children; it means all of His children) as service to Him.

Is it lip service? Is it ritual service or Is it service to humankind in need?

For some religions, yes, it is lip service. It is ritual service. I just don't like to see my Church lumped in with those churches, since we have little in common with them.

 

[Draka]

For some religions, yes, it is lip service. It is ritual service. I just don't like to see my Church lumped in with those churches, since we have little in common with them.

The thing is is that your church, like many other churches, takes in money, but there is so much of that money that is not going to help others. Instead it is used to build and pay for the grand churches and temples to meet in that are totally and completely unnecessary.

You may not like that your church is lumped in with the others, but the truth is, they are just as guilty of the same offense that is being discussed here.

Personally, in my belief, no loving god of any religion would prefer that money be spent on grandiosities than on suffering people. I can't imagine any god even requiring that anyone must praise or worship in a special building, let alone with stain glass windows, turrets, luminenscent lights, and huge statues and such. I can't imagine a loving god wishing that money that is given up for helping others be used to pay the mortgage on a huge monstrosity of a church. Not when that money could be put to more humanitarian needs.

I'm not saying that these churches don't contribute to the needy, but they'd have a hell of a lot more money to do that with if they didn't think they required mock castles to pray in.

 

[Francine]

The thing is is that your church, like many other churches, takes in money, but there is so much of that money that is not going to help others. Instead it is used to build and pay for the grand churches and temples to meet in that are totally and completely unnecessary.

You're looking at it as a top-down thing, rather than a bottom-up thing. There are many very poor people in places like the Philippines who are very proud of their local Cathedral and they do whatever they can to make it even more beautiful.