What's wrong with the old-fashioned local congregations?
2007-12-15 09:34:58 · 14 answers · asked by tarro 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Maybe it's just that there's anonymity in large numbers. They will be less likely to be called upon to actually do something.
This is contrary to a good relationship with God in my opinion. He's not a toy you only wind up on Sunday.
"So I asked this God a question
And by way of firm reply,
He said -- Im not the kind you have to wind up on Sundays."
2007-12-15 10:16:37 · answer #1 · answered by Pragmatism Please 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well they are popular, that's one reason to be Leary of them.
Once a church reaches 60-70 members its at it prime efficiency I think. I have heard that mega Church's do less for world missions than small Church's (30-60 heads.) on a percentage basis. The church exists for two reasons.
1. And most important it is the medium by which God's Gospel of salvation Thur Jesus Christ is transmitted to the world. Thus, we are to get them saved and disciples.
2. For the edifying of the saints. To help each other temporal(Alms to the poor the maintenance of true widows and orphans and the like.) and spiritually Thur prayer and rebuke.
Any thing outside of these points may not be bad but I don't think they should be part of the church.
They are people that go around as ("christian movie critics" and "Christian credit councilors", and "christian psychologists" make a good living and call what they are doing a "ministry". These things may be good and even appropriate but they are not ministry's. Ministry is always Gospel centered and is always aimed at saving souls and or disciple the saved.
If people would run their Church's this way they would be more resources diverted away from golden plumbing and towards saving the lost.
A political party is a political party.
A country club is a country club.
A social club is for socializing.
And a Church is for the "work" of God.
PS
Kayne:
A thith=10% It was 10% to the Hebrews and it was 10% to the greeks (See Horoditus on the tripods given at the panhellenic games.Plutarch makes mention of it as 10% also.) The only person that I have ever read that called a thith less than 10% was David Bach in "Start late finish rich". He like you was inaccurate. Thithing is 10%. Not 1%, not 11%, and not a word that is interchangable for charity like Bach was misusing it.
2ed point.
Jesus both commended the Pharisy for thithing spices and said to his follower do what they do (works.)
As for Jews not thithing that is the 1st that I have heard of that?
Also you are correct that in the bible men thith food, chatell, wine and the like. Money is representative goods, just a medium of exchange other wise you would not sell your 200K house for for a 500K worth of paper, so I really don't see your point on the defference between money and products.
Also Abraham thithed before Moses gave the law so you statement that thithing is part of the law is inaccurate also.
2007-12-15 18:03:49 · answer #2 · answered by sean e 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I see these mega-churches centered on money. As Rod Rodney, a famous promoter of tithing put it, "There's gold in them thar' pews!" He said that there is much money to be "lovingly extracted" from parishioners. They deceive themselves into thinking it's ok to think like this because the money is going to "God's work". But much of it goes in their pockets. And God doesn't need money to get His work accomplished. He can provide the money we need from the mouth of a fish even as we saw when Peter extracted a coin from the mouth of a fish to pay taxes for he and Jesus.
I believe they are a modern day cult. They combine the laws of the old covenant (tithing) and try to lay them on the new covenant, which thing Jesus warned us not to do. They don't even do tithing the way God set it up originally for the Jews. The Jews today don't tithe and are appalled by our churches collecting money and saying that was from the old testament. Did you know that the tithe in the old testament was never money? (Only when it was booty from a battle and that was 1 % not 10) It was food! Food to be eaten by the tither at a feast in Jeruselum!
Sorry this was so long. I hate it when people go on and on. lol
2007-12-15 17:56:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
There's nothing wrong with the local churches. I'd much rather attend a smaller church where everyone knows everyone else than one of those arena sized churches.
2007-12-15 17:38:46 · answer #4 · answered by Little Red Hen 2.0 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Good question! It seems that people have lost sight of what spirituality and religion are all about. These mega-churches are obsessed with wealth and lavish looking churches with gold, etc.
They seem cultish to me. People want easy answers and an "Oprah" style minister. So misguided.
2007-12-15 17:39:58 · answer #5 · answered by JD 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I agree and they disgust me. The church I was married in had a regular attendance of 23. + or - . Then we went to a much larger church when we moved and We quit going after a few weeks.
2007-12-15 17:39:16 · answer #6 · answered by Lord Lothian 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I always wanted to go to church with the enrollment of a city. It's a place where everyone knows your name.
2007-12-15 17:41:26 · answer #7 · answered by tadow8484 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, Im not so hip on the big churches. if people want to attend them, so be it. Its a personal taste thing I think.
2007-12-15 17:43:11 · answer #8 · answered by Loosid 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Whats wrong with a mega-church? It's just more people gathered in one place!
2007-12-15 17:41:09 · answer #9 · answered by TRACY H 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
The bigger the congregation, the more money the church makes.
Simple.
2007-12-15 17:39:25 · answer #10 · answered by battleship potemkin AM 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋