Money & Religion

What role should money play in religious affairs? Should there be a tithe? What about religions like scientology, which charge for training/auditing? Or what about religious charities? How should priests be paid? And on that note, should churches be free to spend their money however they please? What abnormal restrictions are legitimate for churches? Should churches be allowed to be political?

Comment your thoughts on the relationship between God and cash here!

admin: All money belongs to God in the first place, so to tithe is to show that through your deeds. I don't have a job because I never really made a good babysitter, but when I do get money I tithe off that. So yes, there should be a tithe, but not something you have to do. If you don't have enough to pay your mortgages then you shouldn't be expected to tithe because you need to take care of your on family.

I don't really know about Scientology.

If you choose to give you shouldn't be stopped.

I don't have a priest.

As long as they are spending God's money in a way that benefits the church.

Some churches are political, it's not against the law.

I see nothing wrong with a tithe - its an idea supported by scripture, although it is a matter between the individual and God, the church shouldn't force it.

Yes the churches can spend their money as they please, its their money.

Churches can be political, but if they are overly political, they are not likely to be a strong church. (Spiritually that is)

I am never a fan of churches having a lot of money in the bank unless they are saving for something specific. I'm also not a big fan of churches that link a relationship with god with blessings and blessings with money. Theres no biblical support for that model and it sets people up for failure. He never said it was a rose garden...

Pinkie: "All money belongs to God in the first place"

I'm actually curious about the theology behind this statement. I come from an Anglican background, and they take Jesus' statement to "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's" according to the maxim of expressio unius est exclusio alterius - what do you interpret this as saying? A few of those churches do take a tithe though, for reasons nobody has ever really explained to me.

Also, do you see the tithe as more being a repayment to God for all the stuff he's done, or is it more charity to show God how nice you are?

"If you choose to give you shouldn't be stopped."

The reason why religious charities are often controversial is that they often impose conditions on aid. Christian (mostly Catholic) charities in Africa, for instance, used to have a practice of not giving vital food and medicine to people who were caught with contraceptives, which led to the quick spread of the AIDS virus. I do agree that people should have free spending rights, but I also think charity boards shouldn't have to be restricted by normative religious doctrine in helping out people in difficulty. I seem to remember there was a Samaritan once who put aside his personal convictions to show true charity, and I think that's really what all charity should be about.

"As long as they are spending God's money in a way that benefits the church."

Define "benefit". Seems like this can be twisted to justify basically spending money in ANY way.

"Some churches are political, it's not against the law"

In a lot of countries, separation of church and state is a basic constitutional premise. India is a good example. I guess I don't see why people trust churches to be absolutely right about politics. Kinda a false promise, since God doesn't generally reveal the results of elections in advance. I have nothing against people who say a short prayer before they pop into the polling booth, but voting for some guy because some other guy ordered them to do so early in the morning last Sunday is a different matter.

nzlockie: I actually really like your position. It's pretty sensible from a scriptural perspective.

I guess I do have a problem with money being given by people as a kind of thanks for their spiritual fulfillment, and then that same money then being used to undermine the lives of other people (say, people who desperately need to have an abortion). Ultimately it's no more unethical than the kinds of things about 90% of businesses get up to, but churches - this is just my view, of course - should have some kind of special responsibility to do no harm, as though the organisation itself was a kind of doctor for the soul.

I guess I can see why people who are giving as part of a religion would want to impose restrictions on their giving. They are not simply "donating", they are using their money for God's glory. If they see abortion as being something God hates for example, they are obviously not going to want their money going to support it. In their minds that is not what God would want that money to be used for.

I can see how to someone who doesn't accept the concept of God - that standpoint seems ridiculous and even hypocritical - but there you go.

I wish that the western world would stop seeing God as being this cosmic ice-cream man, just there to give everyone what they want and make everyone happy. It's simply not biblical. The worst is when Christians refuse to accept that things like their cancer or some car crash didn't come from God. Taking a stand like that forces you to bend the bible and what it teaches about God into some crazy shapes. It's crazy to me.

admin:

Pinkie: Woah. What's with all the weird character symbols?

* Boreans. Nice one, that's the same as our church.

admin: Um? Idk, I just worked on my response on word.

admin: Um? Idk, I just worked on my response on word.

nzlockie: Oh, tanks, I've been trying to figure out how that's spelled.

Pinkie: Silly Word. I spent forever getting pasting from word to work on the debates. Now forums too? Why can't this word processor just work? *huff*

admin: *Sigh* Sorry!

Pinkie: Not your fault

I'll concentrate on some of the other stuff first.

admin: Okay, cool.