Should a Preacher (minister, pastor or deacon) be paid?

[Sir Knight]

You actually approve of his misinterpretations? How sad.

What "misinterpretations"? "Misinterpretations" according to who? According to you because they do not agree with YOUR understanding? What proof can you offer that YOU are not the one making the "misinterpretations"?

Strange, I do not recall any name-calling. Why would you suggest that I did?

You have been less than charitable in your replies. Others have noticed it. Sad that you can't see it.

 

[elsmitro]

You have been less than charitable in your replies. Others have noticed it. Sad that you can't see it.

What’s that supposed to mean? I try to remain cheerful, even when pushed by those that may be stricken with demons that cause preposterous dreams of self righteousness. I have posted just as many links as you! What proof can you offer to prove that YOU are not the one making the "misinterpretations"? (Me beats own chest and does the Tarzan yell!).
PB doesn’t even know what thread he’s posting in, SAD that you can't see it…

 

[XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq]

PB doesn’t even know what thread he’s posting in, SAD that you can't see it…

Oh yes, I do!

While some of us may disagree/disapprove/whatever with Sir Knight's devotion to his faith. I am impressed with how he has presented his arguments in what I feel is generally a non-condescending or self-righteous manner.

But that is just my opinion. I'm not a religious person and to this day still question the existence of God. However, I do respect the good intentions of the Christian faith and it's historic impact upon western civilization.

 

[Sir Knight]

What’s that supposed to mean? I try to remain cheerful, even when pushed by those that may be stricken with demons that cause preposterous dreams of self righteousness. I have posted just as many links as you! What proof can you offer to prove that YOU are not the one making the "misinterpretations"? (Me beats own chest and does the Tarzan yell!).
PB doesn’t even know what thread he’s posting in, SAD that you can't see it…

Considering that YOU have the conception of the Trinity incorrect -- or, at least it doesn't agree with generally accepted Christian teachings, that places doubt on your other "interpretations" or "misinterpretations".

And it's not the number of links that you post but how you tie them together.

 

[Sir Knight]

No, you're wrong. You have not answered my question because you can't.

I course I have. See here.

http://www.forumsforums.com/3_9/showpost.php?p=93048&postcount=5

Those points were already addressed by another member here. I saw no reason in repeating the same thing.

(And every post since discounts you're efforts.)

Just because you don't agree with the truth does not make it false.

 

[dzalphakilo]

Thanks for all your work on these posts Sir Knight! It's great to see someone pulling references and defending his positions. I think you are doing a great job presenting your arguments.

DZ, elsmitro - you're gonna have to work a little harder. Less name calling more research!

Name calling? Liberal wussie French side got the better of you? I'm not even in this post!!!!

Yeah PB, so good that you're going to convert.

 

[elsmitro]

Oh yes, I do!

Oh no you didn't!

DZ hadn't even posted in this thread at that time.

 

[elsmitro]

Considering that YOU have the conception of the Trinity incorrect -- or, at least it doesn't agree with generally accepted Christian teachings, that places doubt on your other "interpretations" or "misinterpretations".

And it's not the number of links that you post but how you tie them together.

Just because you post 2 pictures that say the exact same thing doesn't mean anything. If they all "IS" God then how are they "IS NOT" one? I guess you have 3 gods? Well, maybe 4, you pray to Marry to don’t you? You’re the one that keeps trying to spin this off in different directions by touting your misinterpretations as fact. So stop accusing me of such things.

I course I have. See here.
Those points were already addressed by another member here. I saw no reason in repeating the same thing.

Just because you don't agree with the truth does not make it false.

The post you keep linking to is worthless as a resolution to my question. Please stop bringing it up. This is obviously not an easy question to answer, unless of course you’ll just accept any answer the devil puts in your face.

 

[Sir Knight]

Just because you post 2 pictures that say the exact same thing doesn't mean anything.

It means that I've posted two pictures PROVING that you are WRONG while you have not posted a single one to back-up your claim.

If they all "IS" God then how are they "IS NOT" one? I guess you have 3 gods?

That is why it is called the MYSTERY of the Trinity -- three different PERSONS in ONE God. That's why when Jesus was about to leave the Apostles, He told them that He would pray to the Father and the Father would send to them the Holy Spirit.

Well, maybe 4, you pray to Marry to don’t you?

Well, that shows your ignorance. When we pray to Mary, we do not 'worship' her. We worship God alone. We honor Mary as the mother of God and ask her to pray for us.

You’re the one that keeps trying to spin this off in different directions by touting your misinterpretations as fact. So stop accusing me of such things.

I'll stop accusing you of it when you stop doing it and you just did it again by bringing "praying to Mary" into the discussion.

The post you keep linking to is worthless as a resolution to my question.

It was demonstrated that it is pleasing to God to have elaborate places of worship built in His honor. Even in Jesus's time, it was recorded that people gave large amounts to support the temple. The early Christians turned over all that they had to the Apostles, who then divided as they best saw fit. What further proof do you need?

This is obviously not an easy question to answer, unless of course you’ll just accept any answer the devil puts in your face.

It is an easy question to answer unless the devil has hardened your heart and you refuse to see the examples of scripture being presented to you.

 

[elsmitro]

That’s a good little “Christian”. Keep pretending that I have introduced nothing to support my points, and that you are correct on your assumptions. I know what I have and have not posted despite what you say. I don’t have time during the day to negate every point you try to make because religion does not pay my bills, and rightly so! Why don’t you go muck up someone else’s post for a while? You have nothing new to add and have caused enough trouble here with your prejudiced view.

 

[Sir Knight]

That’s a good little “Christian”.

And another nice little jab showing that you are not.

Keep pretending that I have introduced nothing to support my points

I don't need to PRETEND because you HAVEN'T.

and that you are correct on your assumptions

I have presented references to SUPPORT my 'assumptions' which you have been unable to revoke and your attempts to do so only introduced further FALSE Christain teachings which you've supplied NO supporting references.

I know what I have and have not posted despite what you say.

And so do I and so does everyone else.

I don’t have time during the day to negate every point you try to make because religion does not pay my bills, and rightly so!

Judging from your past attenpts, you do not have the ABILITY either to negate my points.

Why don’t you go muck up someone else’s post for a while?

If I find a position that I disagree with, I will.

You have nothing new to add

Apparently I do. I have enlighted you that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are NOT the same but three DIFFERENT persons in ONE God. Something that you were obviously ignorant of.

and have caused enough trouble here with your prejudiced view.

I answered the question that you posed. If you weren't looking for an answer, why did you post it on a public discussion board?

And, as far as "prejudiced views", YOU are the one who refuses to accept any answer that does not jive with your pre-concieved notions.

 

[elsmitro]

I do not accept your answer because it is not correct; I have poked to many holes in it. If you can’t accept that fine, deal with it elsewhere.

 

[Sir Knight]

I do not accept your answer because it is not correct; I have poked to many holes in it. If you can’t accept that fine, deal with it elsewhere.

You haven't poked any holes because you failed to provide supporting references to back-up your OPINION and without supporting references, it is ONLY an opinion and an INCORRECT opinion.

If you can’t accept that, deal with it elsewhere.

 

[Melensdad]

At some point we are going to have to realize that Shepard Book, a character in the Sci-Fi TV series Firefly may have summed it up pretty well. "You can't fix the Bible. . . you don't fix faith . . . it fixes you."

When it comes down to discussions of things like paying a Preacher/Minister/Pastor/etc then ultimately it comes back to faith.

 

[elsmitro]

Is a person’s faith supposed to be in God, money, or trinkets? Good Christians should not pick, choose, and misrepresent passages. When I misquoted I admitted I was not taking time to look it up; I did not act as though it were fact. How can someone display something that is not direct word and act as if it is? The answer to that question is easy, it's because of:

"Greed" -- one of the seven deadly sins. The dictionary calls it: "An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth."

I will reserve a few chose words and leave you with somewhat direct ones (as far as I know).

The last days' Church of Laodicea is marked as one full of greed and avarice. The church that Jesus is going to spew out of His mouth is rich in this world's goods. Jesus tells this church: " . . you say, 'I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing'-- and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked -- " (Rev. 3:16-17).

 

[Melensdad]

Sorry, you lost me. I don't understand your point.

 

[Sir Knight]

Is a person’s faith supposed to be in God, money, or trinkets? Good Christians should not pick, choose, and misrepresent passages. When I misquoted I admitted I was not taking time to look it up; I did not act as though it were fact. How can someone display something that is not direct word and act as if it is? The answer to that question is easy, it's because of:

"Greed" -- one of the seven deadly sins. The dictionary calls it: "An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth."

I will reserve a few chose words and leave you with somewhat direct ones (as far as I know).

The last days' Church of Laodicea is marked as one full of greed and avarice. The church that Jesus is going to spew out of His mouth is rich in this world's goods. Jesus tells this church: " . . you say, 'I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing'-- and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked -- " (Rev. 3:16-17).

Let me spell it out in simple terms so that everyone can follow along ...

• FACT: An elaborate place of worship was built in 1 Kings 6 & 7.
  
  
• FACT: God blessed this elaborate place of worship. (1 Kings 8)
  
  
• FACT: Only those things that are good and pleasing to God are blessed by God (Genesis 1:21-22). Nowhere in scripture do we see God ever bless anything that is bad and/or not pleasing to Him.
  
  
• CONCLUSION: The elaborate place of worship built in 1 Kings 6 & 7 was pleasing to God. ( a + b + c )
  
  
• FACT: God does not change from generation to generation. (Malachi 3:6)
  
  
• CONCLUSION: Elaborate places of worship are 'good' and pleasing to God. ( d + e )
  
  
• FACT: People supported God's place of worship with their money contributions. (Luke 21:1)
  
  
• FACT: The early Christians turned over what they had to the Apostles, who distributed to the needy -- which included themselves since they were part of the community of believers. (Acts 2:42-46, 4:32-35 & 6:1-4)
  
  
• FINAL CONCLUSION:
  
  1) It is 'good' and pleasing to God to have elaborate places of worship built in His honor. ( f )
  
  2) Believers are to financially support those places of worship. ( g )
  
  3) In addition to supporting the place of worship with their financial contribution, believers are to provide for the needs of those that minister to them as well as for the others of there number that are in need. ( h )

... Now, using the letters of the alphabet (so there will be no confusion), kindly explain WHERE you believe the problem is and WHY you consider it to be wrong?

 

[elsmitro]

Nope, don't get it.

 

[Sir Knight]

Which part? I broke it down into individual parts so there'll be less confusion when discussing it. Which part do you disagree with and why?

 

[elsmitro]

You want to know what I don’t get? How you can take this one example and say this is it! Elaborate places of worship are “REQUIRED”; and, you’re using this as your whole basis to argue it. It’s just absurd… Think of all of those that were retched, poor, or worse that were blessed and loved just as much.

 

[Sir Knight]

You want to know what I don’t get? How you can take this one example and say this is it! Elaborate places of worship are “REQUIRED”; and, you’re using this as your whole basis to argue it. It’s just absurd… Think of all of those that were retched, poor, or worse that were blessed and loved just as much.

It's far from absurd. The bible is filled with examples that giving God over very best is pleasing to God and not doing so is displeasing to God. You do not have to go any further than the first book of the bible to see this. Abel sacrificed his best offerings to God and God accepted it. While Cain did not offer his best to God and that offering was rejected.

We are REQUIRED to give God our BEST.

 

[Snowcat Operations]

AMEN!

 

[richfolkes]

To help in this debate, I'll give you an insight into Ancient Israeli finance. This covers three aspects.

1: Taxation
2: Interest and Debt
3: Real Estate

1. Taxation: In ancient Israel, there was a flat rate of 23% tax, levied to rich and poor alike. The first 10% went to public works and social services. This included the maintenance of roads and government buildings, salaries and wages to government officials, care of the sick and disabled, health care benefits, etc.

The second 10% went to the Temple to pay for its upkeep and support the priests, etc.

The other 3% was cumulatively used to pay for celebrations every nine years.

2: Interest. Usury (the charging of interest) on domestic lending was prohibited. In other words, an Israeli could not lend money to another Israeli and charge any interest rate. If (Translating into modern currency) an Israeli loaned $25,000 to a fellow Israeli, he was to get $25,000 paid back. Not $25,000 plus 15% interest over 10 years.

Usury, however was allowed on foreign nations and their nationals. For example, an Israeli could loan that same $25,000 to a Spartan or Macedonian and charge interest.

And as for domestic lending itself, all loans were canceled every six years. Do not think that rule gives the borrower license to keep the loan indefinitely. If the loan wasn't paid back within six years, the borrower was then indentured to the lender. And would work for the lender until the loan was paid back. Thus, an Israeli was very careful about the amount of money he would borrow, and make sure that he would be able to pay back the loan in six years.

As for real estate, all titles reverted to their original owners every fifty years. Which illustrates the importance of inheritance.

This system of finance protected the Kingdom of Israel from financial crises, since it was God Himself who took care of the nation's debt.

Israel became a nation back in 1948. Suppose this were to have happened thirty years earlier (1918) and the Knesset were to reinstitute this same financial system. The Stock Market Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression would have had absolutely no effect on Israel.

And Israel would have been lending money to both the Soviet Union and the Third Reich during WWII at hefty interest rates which would bring down both Hitler and Stalin after the war. Thus averting the Cold War altogether.

Now, this thread is talking about salaries and wages for religious ministers. The salary given to the minister keeps him and his family, same as any worker. Because being a preacher is just as much a full time job as being a policeman is.

This is why the Ancient Israeli government gave 10% of its taxation revenue to the Temple.

And hence we pay taxes in order to pay our civil service workers, from the Mailman to the President.

 

[brazospete]

Yeah right, that sounds like a greedy person that likes to wear expensive robes and funny hats to me... In fact, I'd venture to say that GOD could care less about how fancy the place you worship is; as long as you’re heart is in it. You could worship alone in an open field and it would mean more to him than all the treasure the fancy hypocrites could muster.

You and I think alike elsmitro. I don't find in my bible God requiring more than a fairly elaborate tent to house the Ark of the Covenant the design of which God gave to Moses which contained a place for the Levites to offer sacrifices, but the People were left out in the very elaborate OUTSIDE! It was in David's heart to build a Temple for God and for Israel (he Was the King) and God Loved him so he let his son Solomon build it. As for you mr. Knight Quote chapter and verse for these elaborate temples God demanded. By the way all Israel paid Tithe(tenth) for a sacrifice to God and the Levites lived off that.

 

[SShepherd]

As to the OP, yes, a pastor should be paid. Many have families, and in many the wife works ( either in or outside the church)

about this whole " god requires an elaborate worship place/church" I don't agree with, .

The whole idea that the temple of solomon as a reference for lavish churches can be handled with this:
"During Solomon's reign, the Tabernacle was replaced by the Temple as a sign that God had given his people rest from their wandering."


No where in the Bible is a church referred to as a building. Nor is it ever referred to as a corporate entity. According to the Word of God, church means people. In the New Testament, church is the translation of the Greek word (pronounced) ek-klay-see-ah, meaning a gathering of those called. It was later, in post-apostolic times, that the Greek word pronounced kuriakon came to be used to denote a place, and it is from that word that the English word "church" is believed to have been derived. But unlike man's definition, God's definition of "church" has always been His people.

Matthew 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

 

[ncroamer65]

From what I've read in these posts there is a large comments pertaining
to the "Trappings" that are refered to as "church".
As to the title of this thread, if the congreation does not provide for
the needs of this person called or requeasted then how can they call
themselves true christians. I haven't known many "Preachers ect."
that came to the ministery for materal gain. Paid is not a term I
would use but commensated.
To deliver the message from God is their calling.

 

[XeVfTEUtaAqJHTqq]

I know our Pastor does a lot of work for our church and he deserves a good salary. He organizes events, visits the elderly, manages the church and school (maintenance, fundraising, finances), performs counseling, and probably does a lot of stuff that I don't see (because I don't go very often). I'm not sure how he would get by without some form of reimbursement and since our Pastor is really good I have no problem seeing that he is paid enough to stick around.

 

[Durwood RIP]

Of course a pastor deserves to be paid but i have a problem with those selling their books or tapes to make money, Jesus said "freely u have received, freely give." I see people who go thru life's experiences that will also help other people going thru that same experience, and they want u to pay them for their help. So that means only those with money can get their answer. I can't imagine Jesus charging $10.00 apiece for his wisdom of his sermon on the mount. I say put it up on the internet for free and u can also put donations accepted but not required. And very few worship on the Sabbath, The jews do and i think the seventh day adventists do and maybe a few others is all. The sabbath is saturday , not sunday. God rested on the seventh day of creation, not the first.

 

[SShepherd]

so..which day did he create the calendar on

 

[benspawpaw]

i notice in your thing at the top of your post where it says where you are from that you are calling all of us a turd. do you realy think you should be quoting the bible when you show disrespect to all of us? WWJD