Is there a better way to 'do Church'?

[arachnogeek]

Is there anything wrong with our current model of doing Church? Could there be improvements made? 

Are the following elements biblical? 

1. Tithing

2. Pastor salaries

3. Million-dollar church buildings

4. Seminary-trained pastors

5. Church incorporation 

Le me know what your thoughts are! 

 

Thanks 

 

 

[Mike 2]

Probably the best place to start is with a definition of church

a church?

the church?

?

Edited June 27, 2018 by Mike 2

[arachnogeek]

1 hour ago, Mike 2 said:

Probably the best place to start is with a definition of church

a church?

the church?

?

Great point! Let's assume we're dealing with 'a church'. 

[arachnogeek]

8 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Acts 2:41-42 NKJV
[41] Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. [42] And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.

 

That's a good place to start! 

[Guest]

Quick thoughts on your five specific areas of interest. There are others, that's for sure.

21 hours ago, arachnogeek said:

1. Tithing - Without addressing the issue as one is tempted to, but looking at practical matters... NEVER should a church give a timeslot to that 'giving mini sermon'. Priorities wrong. What do you think that looks like when you stand back? 'They're just about money' That is a total abuse of an 'element'. There can be a proper avenue for giving (preferred over "tithing"), but let me not drag this out further, just to make that one comment for now.

2. Pastor salaries - It's a well paid profession (for most in the West). Admitting it is the first step. Often people who end up financial managers of churches are quite well off. This doesn't help. I would like to see a treasurer of a church chosen because he has proven to be a giver, not a store-er. I would like to see Pastor's wages fall to MEDIAN persons (not mean) in the country wage MAXIMUM. This is so that no one can look on and see someone making a well-off career. What, again, do you think onlookers see? Christ... in a cushy Pastoral middle-management job? No salary should alienate the poor.

3. Million-dollar church buildings -No. Giving in the New Testament, the "ministry of the saints", was from fortunate churches to the famine/poor church in Jerusalem. MOST of the New Testament letter giving passages are in this context. SO THEN, if you have that much, I can guarantee there is a church somewhere in difficult situations that it would be more fitting to righteousness to give to them. Churches should be givers... to other churches and not spend it all on themselves. There is one church. This would be pure fellowship and good stewardship.

4. Seminary-trained pastors - Bible training should not be married to the academic world like it is. It is by nature exclusive and expensive. Intellectualism is not the way God picks His teachers and Shepherds. That's not to say good ones haven't come through the system, just that it isn't actually a healthy marriage of worlds. I do think this structure is a broken element of 'normal' church pathways. Bring back Bible training into the local church setting. Sermons and mid week chats are not enough. This task should not be handed over to academic institutions like it is. This is also not to demonise intellectuals. How will we be when the world doesn't approve our current university degrees and they lose all 'formal' connection to tertiary world?

5. Church incorporation - As far as it's possible I guess we Christians follow the law. So our very regulated environment has us either incorporating or not as our 'official' structure. Personally, I think unincorporated is the way to go, given now the hostility coming from the Government, who has more say and more reporting needed in incorporated organisations. I know some argue legal issues the other way, but they never ever seriously come into play. Does the Bible require these things? No. In a simple sense. But IF it isn't Christ-denying we should follow requirements of the Government. I speak in Australia, but a church say in a more hostile and controlling place like China towards Christianity, where the Gov wants to control (and subdue) elements of it - that begins to deny Christ as head and leader... far over Xi. So under that Gov, one understands them flying 'off the books', against the Govs requirements.

 

[arachnogeek]

12 hours ago, LukeRIC said:

Quick thoughts on your five specific areas of interest. There are others, that's for sure.

On 6/27/2018 at 6:37 AM, arachnogeek said:

1. Tithing - Without addressing the issue as one is tempted to, but looking at practical matters... NEVER should a church give a timeslot to that 'giving mini sermon'. Priorities wrong. What do you think that looks like when you stand back? 'They're just about money' That is a total abuse of an 'element'. There can be a proper avenue for giving (preferred over "tithing"), but let me not drag this out further, just to make that one comment for now.

2. Pastor salaries - It's a well paid profession (for most in the West). Admitting it is the first step. Often people who end up financial managers of churches are quite well off. This doesn't help. I would like to see a treasurer of a church chosen because he has proven to be a giver, not a store-er. I would like to see Pastor's wages fall to MEDIAN persons (not mean) in the country wage MAXIMUM. This is so that no one can look on and see someone making a well-off career. What, again, do you think onlookers see? Christ... in a cushy Pastoral middle-management job? No salary should alienate the poor.

3. Million-dollar church buildings -No. Giving in the New Testament, the "ministry of the saints", was from fortunate churches to the famine/poor church in Jerusalem. MOST of the New Testament letter giving passages are in this context. SO THEN, if you have that much, I can guarantee there is a church somewhere in difficult situations that it would be more fitting to righteousness to give to them. Churches should be givers... to other churches and not spend it all on themselves. There is one church. This would be pure fellowship and good stewardship.

4. Seminary-trained pastors - Bible training should not be married to the academic world like it is. It is by nature exclusive and expensive. Intellectualism is not the way God picks His teachers and Shepherds. That's not to say good ones haven't come through the system, just that it isn't actually a healthy marriage of worlds. I do think this structure is a broken element of 'normal' church pathways. Bring back Bible training into the local church setting. Sermons and mid week chats are not enough. This task should not be handed over to academic institutions like it is. This is also not to demonise intellectuals. How will we be when the world doesn't approve our current university degrees and they lose all 'formal' connection to tertiary world?

5. Church incorporation - As far as it's possible I guess we Christians follow the law. So our very regulated environment has us either incorporating or not as our 'official' structure. Personally, I think unincorporated is the way to go, given now the hostility coming from the Government, who has more say and more reporting needed in incorporated organisations. I know some argue legal issues the other way, but they never ever seriously come into play. Does the Bible require these things? No. In a simple sense. But IF it isn't Christ-denying we should follow requirements of the Government. I speak in Australia, but a church say in a more hostile and controlling place like China towards Christianity, where the Gov wants to control (and subdue) elements of it - that begins to deny Christ as head and leader... far over Xi. So under that Gov, one understands them flying 'off the books', against the Govs requirements.

 

This is a very balanced approach!! I appreciate your perspective

[Deborah_]

On 6/27/2018 at 11:37 AM, arachnogeek said:

Is there anything wrong with our current model of doing Church? Could there be improvements made? 

Are the following elements biblical? 

1. Tithing

2. Pastor salaries

3. Million-dollar church buildings

4. Seminary-trained pastors

5. Church incorporation 

Le me know what your thoughts are! 

 

Thanks 

 

 

1. Biblical. Not compulsory under the new covenant, but sacrificial giving is encouraged - tithing needs to be discussed, even if it isn't expected of people, so that they understand what "giving" really means.

2. Biblical. "The worker deserves his wages." (I Timothy 5:18) The really tricky question is: how much?

3. Not Biblical. An increasing proportion of British churches rent their accommodation.

4. Not Biblical, but untrained pastors can cause no end of problems. 'Gifting' isn't enough; people need to learn sound doctrine and be trained in preaching, counselling, etc. The early Church didn't have seminaries, but Paul trained Timothy, didn't he? 

5. As a British Christian, I don't understand the term "incorporation", so I'll have to pass on that one!

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Badjao33 said:

When put into context, I think what Paul is saying in that verse is that pastors are worthy of double "honor", just like when an ox is being used to separate grain, the ox is worthy to eat some of the grain; and laborers who work, are worthy of the wage they receive.

In his same letter to Timothy, Paul also says that widows are worthy of "honor" and slaves are to "honor" their masters. If honor means pay, then the widows in the church should also receive compensation and slaves should give compensation to their owners. Since that doesn't make sense, I can't see how this verse can be used to justify paying pastors a salary. If individuals out of the goodness of their heart want to give their pastor a financial gift, that is one thing, but asking the church as a whole to pay the pastor a salary is not Biblical in my opinion. 

That word TIME , for example, in Matt 27.9, Acts 5.2, (1Cor 7.23) means (A monetary value) pricing. The Timothy context is clearly picking up on that nuance Evidenced by the following verse. 

The "double" seems likely saying that... The first honour is the honour you referenced in your post like respect/our use of "honour" (persons 'value'/worth/position being high - hard to explain but you should get it) , which is a true usage of that word, but the other (double up) 'honour' (TIME) they are worthy of is monetary. So the double is for both nuances of that word. Honour and monetary pricing. I don't think it is like 'double money' like big income. That is off. Not does simply 'lots of' honour explain the following verse context... Particularly given the usage of TIME as pointed out above. It seems forced to avoid it. It is Christian to give but also Christian to pay for work done - Jacob 5.4. If some are paid too much or don't work well that is a separate issue.

It's also worth noting that Church salaries are typically paid from a stream of voluntary giving, so the two aren't really opposing. One is about where the church gets money. One is a part of how it spends it. Both are discussable Indeed

Edited June 30, 2018 by Guest

[arachnogeek]

22 hours ago, Badjao33 said:

If honor means pay, then the widows in the church should also receive compensation 

I agree with you, but some make the case that in 1 Timothy 5:3-16, widows are indeed receiving compensation, even though it is referred to as 'honour'. This is a slight problem for those of us in opposition of tithing. What are your thoughts about that?

[Mike Mclees]

I could have sworn I had a response in this.  If there needs to be a better way to do church which church is being spoken of? Is this setting a better standard for all denom's . I don't want to be a  dumper but  the church as we know today is not savable. The ax must be laid to the toot. The organized church systems are subject to every kind of belief system and leadership.  Who is going to be able to change all this, but Christ only. The church is not the church as it was when it was born at Pentecost. Christ has a bride and he already knows them. If Im missing something that please tell me. You want to change something that is already corrupted beyond repair