When Money Comes Into Religion...

[Draka]

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.

To which I have to ask "why?"

First, isn't pride a sin?

Second, isn't putting the money to use helping each other more spiritually and physically important than whether the building they pray in is considered beautiful or not?

 

[Don Penguinoini]

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.

But these are two entirely different communites here, the UK/US and the Phillipines.

 

[Katzpur]

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.

Draka, with all due respect, you really have no idea how much of my Church's money is going to help others and how much is going towards buildings where we meet to worship. Unless you believe that people shouldn't build churches at all, your criticism is unfounded. Do you have any idea how vast the LDS Church's humanitarian efforts worldwide are? During the last roughly twenty years, we as a Church have provided more than $725 million in total assistance to needy individuals in 163 countries. You can be absolutely certain that only the tiniest minority of these people are Mormons. Supplies that have been distributed include 54,905 tons of food, 9,152 tons of medical equipment, 73,226 tons of surplus clothing and 5,857 tons of educational supplies. 623,153 days of labor have been donated. We contributed significantly to the Beirut, Lebanon, conflict relief in 2006; the Yogyakarta, Indonesia, earthquake relief in 2006; the Hurricanes Katrina and Rita relief 2005; the Pakistan earthquake relief in 2005; the Africa measles vaccination campaigns in 2004–2006 and the Southeast Asia tsunami relief in 2004–2006. Our Church membership is less than 2/10 of 1% of the world's population. How many organizations of its size do you know of that care for the world's needy in such a generous way? Short of making it our goal to single-handedly eliminate world hunger, poverty, illiteracy and disease, what more would you expect of us? Would it be to simply build no places where we can gather together to worship?

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.

You've made some sweeping generalities, but have said nothing that even begins to substantiate your claims -- at least not with regards to my Church.​

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 can understand that, from the perspective of a Pagan or Wiccan, a building set aside for worship services may be unnecessary. For Latter-day Saints, and most Christians, it is an integral part of our worship. Speaking with regards to my Church specifically, I don't know where 13 million people would meet together if not in Church buildings. If you've ever been in an LDS Church, you could not have helped but notice that it was just about as sparse as a Church could get. Furthermore, we do not dedicate a single, solitary building anywhere in the world without it being fully paid for up front. Our Churches are not monstrosities and our mortages on them are non-existant.

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.

Mock castles? Draka, that doesn't sound like you.

 

[Draka]

Mock castles? Draka, that doesn't sound like you.

If you saw the vast majority of churches around me you'd understand. Yes, there are a few simple, understated ones, but the most of them are HUGE, with turrets, stained glass windows, enormous crosses on them and bells that might as well be wrung by a hunchback.

They, for all intents and purposes, might as well be miniature castles. All they are lacking are dungeons. Though there might be some with those too...who knows?

I guess you can just chalk this up to the Pagan in me. I see special buildings to worship in as a luxury that is not necessary for belief. I think that meeting together with loved ones and friends in each others homes is just dandy. For that matter, I don't believe that you have to even leave the house to pray or worship whenever you want. My mother is Catholic and she hasn't stepped foot in a church since she was a child except for the occassional wedding or funeral. She seems to feel the same way.

 

[Francine]

First, isn't pride a sin?

Self-pride is a sin, but Christ-pride is not.

Pss.34:[2] My soul shall make her boast in the LORD: the humble shall hear thereof, and be glad.

Second, isn't putting the money to use helping each other more spiritually and physically important than whether the building they pray in is considered beautiful or not?

Pss.65:[4] Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple.

 

[gnomon]

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.

-what's that for. Read the posts. I did not insert this term "Truth". It is a response to those who do.

This is either a Christian bashing thread or a thread of general ignorance.

 

[gnomon]

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 don't get it either.

Many people define religion among their very own myopic view and if other religious beliefs don't fit into that narrow frame of thought....then there bad.

 

[gnomon]

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.

I have misunderstood nothing in this thread. I think many forum members stepped in and took on more than they can handle. Since you chose to duck out of answering my question I'll just assume you have no idea of what you are talking about and leave it there.

 

[cardero]

Self-pride is a sin, but Christ-pride is not.

Pss.34:[2] My soul shall make her boast in the LORD: the humble shall hear thereof, and be glad.

Pss.65:[4] Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple.

YOUR pride, if YOU choose to UNDERSTAND and develop it, should BE for everything and everyONE. This is the considerate and NATURAL way to handle pride and share it. To use pride needlessly by furthering YOUR own causes and methods is an example of abusing pride. NO ONE IS BETTER THAN ANOTHER ONE.

HELLO IT'S ME: An Interview With GOD
Chapter: Pride, Stubborness and Ego
Pg: 289

It was MY pleasure to enact a functional physical body for souls to inhabit, but please, put away YOUR donations.

HELLO IT’S ME: An Interview With GOD
Chapter: The One True GOD?
Pg: 320


One thing that can BE assured is that I will never abuse or use MY UNDERSTANDING unjustly or selfishly. So please, no more burnings of incense or animal sacrifices. The things I do, I do out of LOVE and MY fondness for sharing.

HELLO IT’S ME: An Interview With GOD
Chapter: The One True GOD?
Pg: 321

 

[blackout]

I have been considering this thread from the sidelines for a couple of days now.

I want to start by saying that people who go out and earn money
have EVERY respectable right to do WHATEVER they want with the money they earn.
(unless of course they are directly/blatantly hurting others somehow with that money).

If people want clubhouses... meeting rooms... amphetheatres...
whatever. it's fine.

If a religion is about tuning into a frequency...
and a large hall is what amplifies that frequency
to the point of desired reality effect...
then great!
(actually that sounds kinda fun & intreiging--
though I just made it up.)

If you need a hall to enact rituals and rites...
because those rituals and rites
in that hall are the thing you dig...
then fine.

Every "membership" requires SOME kind of "dues".

I guess I just rather prefer the simpler kind of "dues"
that comes with just being a member of the human species.
You know. The dues of life.

If you pay for a thing for YOURSELF...
that is fine.
But WHY then pretend that thing is for the poor and the downtrodden?
When the poor and downtrodden cannot even afford membership there?

Are the poor and downtrodden REQUIRED to JOIN A CHURCH for salvation?!?
Are they then REQUIRED to PAY for said church?

If church is an option fine.
For your own edification and enjoyment and entertainment.

If it is a REQUIREMENT for your salvation...
then it is nothing but a BIG BS BUSINESS.

There is nothing I dislike MORE than the elite world money system.
It is the enslavement of the world.

I'm more for breaking out of... away from ... the elite run world system.

I believe Jesus was as well.

IMHO any church labeled "Jesus"...
should look like...
well...
a tunic and a pair of sandals.

 

[cardero]

I don't get it either.

Many people define religion among their very own myopic view and if other religious beliefs don't fit into that narrow frame of thought....then there bad.

Maybe the second picture of that example is a bit unclear but the child in the picture is suffering from a disease called muscular dystrophy.
Let us say that some people donate money (around $50 million dollars), human time and talent to the religion of gnomon but the only two choices that the benefactors give you is that you can build a temple for God or use the money and manpower towards the care and cure towards muscular dystrophy. Which would you choose?

 

[Francine]

Let us say that some people donate money (around $50 million dollars), human time and talent to the religion of gnomon but the only two choices that the benefactors give you is that you can build a temple for God or use the money and manpower towards the care and cure towards muscular dystrophy. Which would you choose?

Build the $50 million dollar temple, then cast the benefactors out of the religion of gnomon for presuming to tell gnomon how to spend money designated for the LORD, sell off temple assets worth $25 million dollars, and use THAT towards a cure for muscular dystrophy.

 

[Katzpur]

Maybe the second picture of that example is a bit unclear but the child in the picture is suffering from a disease called muscular dystrophy.
Let us say that some people donate money (around $50 million dollars), human time and talent to the religion of gnomon but the only two choices that the benefactors give you is that you can build a temple for God or use the money and manpower towards the care and cure towards muscular dystrophy. Which would you choose?

So how much time and money have you personally contributed towards a cure for muscular dystrophy? If you had $50 million to spend, would you give 100% of it away? Every dime you spend money on home improvements, furniture, a home-entertainment system, travel, a new car, new clothes, entertainment, etc., could be spent to find a cure for muscular dystrophy. Don't you have as much responsibility in the matter as a religious organization does? What lets you off the hook? If you spend any money at all on things that could be considered luxuries, you are as guilty as the churches you're criticizing.

 

[gnomon]

Deleted my last two posts......to be nice.

In short...specifics! Give me specifics!

 

[cardero]

Katzpur writes: If you had $50 to spend, would you give 100% of it away?

If I had $50 to spend on muscular dystrophy or to give it towards a GOD that requires no money, I would give the whole $50 towards muscular dystrophy.

Katzpur writes Every dime you spend money on home improvements, furniture, a home-entertainment system, travel, a new car, new clothes, entertainment, etc., could be spent to find a cure for muscular dystrophy.

This is a common but desparate defense. Basically Patrickism lives modestly, spends conservatively, seeks a meager living and usually breaks even. With the exception of being active in the yearly SEFA program (an incentive that I wholeheartedly encouraged mrscardero to be involved in) and our support in giving to the March Of Dimes, I also give and support sound local and community causes, most of my contributions come in the form of time or the giving of myself.

Katzpur writes: Don't you have as much responsibility in the matter as a religious organization does?

As for being human and living on this same planet, yes I do but I am also accountable to make sure that I not only have my personal beliefs and responsibilities in order but to continually inquire of myself and to know when and if I can do and give more.

Katzpur writes: If you spend any money at all on things that could be considered luxuries, you are as guilty as the churches you're criticizing.

Most of the things that I (or you) would consider and purchase as luxuries are either recycled or recirculated into amounts intended towards necessities and I have learned to be very smart and careful with this.

As for being guilty of the churches that I criticize, this will never be a charge that anyone could pin on me. I will never see $600 million dollars incurred from Patrickism. I would never shame, guilt or instill fear in my fellow humans for money to further my own agenda. I would never wantonly franchise my beliefs or build exclusive, extravagant monuments to the heavens in the name of Patrick or GOD.

Katzpur writes: What lets you off the hook?

To be honest Katzpur, I am not an organization but just one person and I do not really qualify for these accusations. I have never pursued money or fortune or felt a need to extract money from others, so it would go without saying that I do not have a lot to financially offer someone. The prospect to give of my time and myself is probably the most successful gift I could offer anyone (at this moment). I use the word successful because when I do give anything of myself, it always is never expected but when it is received, it is very much appreciated. I think religions have promoted a high expectation of giving and in doing so have also brought high hopes in what exactly they could and should deliver. They have over-extended their pride and credibility and our now unable to recognize the capacity and capability of their giving potential. The biggest difference between what I have to offer and what any religious organization has to offer is that when the receiver of the gift looks over our shoulders, they will never see or discover anything that over-exceeds my contribution. They will know that I have given all I could give.

 

[Katzpur]

I would never shame, guilt or instill fear in my fellow humans for money to further my own agenda. I would never wantonly franchise my beliefs or build exclusive monuments to the heavens in the name of Patrick or GOD.

I'm glad to hear that, Patrick. My Church would not be guilty of that either.

 

[Don Penguinoini]

I have misunderstood nothing in this thread. I think many forum members stepped in and took on more than they can handle. Since you chose to duck out of answering my question I'll just assume you have no idea of what you are talking about and leave it there.

Ill asume you never read the OP, and if you did, you would not have stated what you did.

 

[gnomon]

Ill asume you never read the OP, and if you did, you would not have stated what you did.

The OP, by itself, is unsubstantiated.

The thread, as it continued, presented us with wonderful ignorance. It was that to which I responded. I also asked for specifics. Do you have any?

Or should I expect more vague generalizations?

 

[gnomon]

This is a common but desparate defense.

....

To be honest Katzpur, I am not an organization but just one person and I do not really qualify for these accusations. I have never pursued money or fortune or felt a need to extract money from others, so it would go without saying that I do not have a lot to financially offer someone. The prospect to give of my time and myself is probably the most successful gift I could offer anyone (at this moment). I use the word successful because when I do give anything of myself, it always is never expected but when it is received, it is very much appreciated. I think religions have promoted a high expectation of giving and in doing so have also brought high hopes in what exactly they could and should deliver. They have over-extended their pride and credibility and our now unable to recognize the capacity and capability of their giving potential. The biggest difference between what I have to offer and what any religious organization has to offer is that when the receiver of the gift looks over our shoulders, they will never see or discover anything that over-exceeds my contribution. They will know that I have given all I could give.

Garbage. Pat yourself on the back. It must be nice to hold to a religion of one and criticize others when you have no knowledge of what you speak of. A small number of people inhabit a spartan building once a week and they are to be chided for spending money on maintaining that building. What if some of them travel to other nations to not only donate money but actually, physically, help other people.

Is it that they are a larger group than your island of one that they are wrong?

I ask for specifics. You provide none. A simple link to Benny Hinn, Peter Popoff, New Age organizations promoting spiritual beliefs to pad one's income, Schuller's Crystal Cathedral and many more when combined do not represent the variety of religious belief not only in this country but the world over. But then again, I am not the one casting generalized fallacious arguments in ignorance.

Let us say that some people donate money (around $50 million dollars), human time and talent to the religion of gnomon but the only two choices that the benefactors give you is that you can build a temple for God or use the money and manpower towards the care and cure towards muscular dystrophy. Which would you choose?

A boring false dichotomy which is completely unrelated to this...discussion.

 

[gnomon]

Why not? I shouldn't waste it after all.

I have been considering this thread from the sidelines for a couple of days now.

I want to start by saying that people who go out and earn money
have EVERY respectable right to do WHATEVER they want with the money they earn.
(unless of course they are directly/blatantly hurting others somehow with that money).

If people want clubhouses... meeting rooms... amphetheatres...
whatever. it's fine.

If a religion is about tuning into a frequency...
and a large hall is what amplifies that frequency
to the point of desired reality effect...
then great!
(actually that sounds kinda fun & intreiging--
though I just made it up.)

If you need a hall to enact rituals and rites...
because those rituals and rites
in that hall are the thing you dig...
then fine.

Every "membership" requires SOME kind of "dues".

I guess I just rather prefer the simpler kind of "dues"
that comes with just being a member of the human species.
You know. The dues of life.

If you pay for a thing for YOURSELF...
that is fine.
But WHY then pretend that thing is for the poor and the downtrodden?
When the poor and downtrodden cannot even afford membership there?

Are the poor and downtrodden REQUIRED to JOIN A CHURCH for salvation?!?
Are they then REQUIRED to PAY for said church?

If church is an option fine.
For your own edification and enjoyment and entertainment.

If it is a REQUIREMENT for your salvation...
then it is nothing but a BIG BS BUSINESS.

There is nothing I dislike MORE than the elite world money system.
It is the enslavement of the world.

I'm more for breaking out of... away from ... the elite run world system.

I believe Jesus was as well.

IMHO any church labeled "Jesus"...
should look like...
well...
a tunic and a pair of sandals.

From the sidelines....

AA has clubhouses. It is a spiritual, and in my experienced opinion, a religious establishment as well. I already told you why they require money and actually have problems getting the money in individual clubhouses. Only a fool would cast judgement on them out of ignorance.

Your life might be better served...
And the general tenor...
Of UNDERSTANDING...

If you actually attempted...
To learn...


Anything.

Exactly who the hell do you think you are anyway dictating how others choose to practice their religion. EsPeCiAlLy CoNsIdErInG YoU DoN't EvEn KnOw WhAt ThE various religious
.............................beliefs
................................................are
..............................in
............the
...............................................first
............................................................................... place.

Stylistic writing for no purpose aside. Please, its about casting general aspersions, a logical fallacy, rather than being specific.