Jump to content

Rich Preachers


Ted Lange

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

Can someone explain why they are a thing?  

Fear is a powerful motivator, and for those who believe in judgement after death, eternity is a long time. And it's not new. Why do you think the Vatican is worth billions?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because a lot of people are greedy.  If somebody can make them accept God wants them to be greedy, that they deserve all the things they want then that is who they will support.  These preachers can't condone greed without practicing it.   They make their money by telling others to give to God seed money and God will repay them many times over.

Pretty down to earth explanations on the phenomena here:

 

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6553063-will-jesus-buy-me-a-double-wide

Edited by pyrohornIII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wife’s family is Catholic but not too into it...so like most Catholics I guess.   Anyways, traveling the world and seeing various basilicas etc really blows your mind.  You’ll go to some ass poor third world country and it’s nothing but ornate gold and glam where the downtrodden worship.  I feel like I’m taking crazy pills when I see them ‘pass the plate’ at these things.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can convince people that Hell is a real place, but offer them forgiveness for absolutely anything, they can find all sorts of ways to accumulate massive wealth and they'll gladly give you 10% of it in exchange for forgiveness for how they got it.

Plus the church colonized every resource-rich nation on earth and stole what it wanted, errr, spread salvation.

It really is history's best business model, errrr, tax-exempt charity.

If only my atheist sense of right and wrong didn't preclude me from getting in on the action...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

Plus the church colonized every resource-rich nation on earth and stole what it wanted, errr, spread salvation.

Even if you conflate the Catholic Church with the Kingdoms of Spain and Portugal, and maybe Holland, which might be fair-ish, this is hardly accurate.  And even then you have to lump in the Church of England, and that isn't fair.  And the rest of the Protestant denomination, which constitute a vast swath of "church," at least for the last 600 years, had nothing to do with it.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I suppose one should make a distinction between a rich preacher and a rich church.  Neither is entirely (or at all) consistent with fundamental tenets of Christianity, as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity, but a preacher moreso than a church.

They are obviously a bit interchangeable, but preacher was more my question.   Think Ed Young in Houston.  How can any Christian reconcile what the Bible says and how Ed lives?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

They are obviously a bit interchangeable, but preacher was more my question.   Think Ed Young in Houston.  How can any Christian reconcile what the Bible says and how Ed lives?   

There are quite a few churches that have become property rich by occupying what has become prime real estate for very long periods of time that spend their entire operating budgets on their "mission" and congregants.  And then there are more modern churches that have purchased prime real estate in order to enrich their pastors by attracting more congregants.

I don't really know that much about Ed Young except that he sure seems to be a cheesedick televangelist that falls into the latter category.  Osteen certainly qualifies.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

There are quite a few churches that have become property rich by occupying what has become prime real estate for very long periods of time that spend their entire operating budgets on their "mission" and congregants.  And then there are more modern churches that have purchased prime real estate in order to enrich their pastors by attracting more congregants.

Fair.  But how does someone who has read the Bible think the leader of the church should have a helicopter or his wife drive a $300,000 car?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pyrohornIII said:

Because a lot of people are greedy.  If somebody can make them accept God wants them to be greedy, that they deserve all the things they want then that is who they will support.  These preachers can't condone greed without practicing it.   They make their money by telling others to give to God seed money and God will repay them many times over.

Pretty down to earth explanations on the phenomena here:

 

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6553063-will-jesus-buy-me-a-double-wide

This is the likeliest explanation. Prosperity gospel pretty much runs off of the grifters classic principle of working a victim's greed. The trick is convincing the person it isn't greed but a religious imperative to become wealthy. Then as you said, the victim is convinced to invest seed money.

American Christianity has come a long way since the days of the Puritan Work Ethic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

And while we are at it, can any republican explain why Osteen deserves tax breaks?

The idea with the tax break originally was that churches provide social and community services that weren't available generally.  Similar secular organizations receive the same benefit.

The exemption isn't easily revoked because, like granting/deniying religious rights to peyote-smoking inmates, judging the "legitimacy" of religious beliefs is a dangerous business.

I'm all for holding their feet to the fire on restricted activities that cause a loss of the exemption, namely participating in political campaigns, but even that can get tricky.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

Fair.  But how does someone who has read the Bible think the leader of the church should have a helicopter or his wife drive a $300,000 car?

Hell no.  I don't know what kind of gymnastics these people go through to justify that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

OK.  I’m genuinely curious from hearing from the folks that go to churches like 2nd Baptist on their thoughts 

Do they just think Jesus was full of shit?

Don't know all that much about 2nd Baptist, but I am highly suspicious of churches that have multiple locations.  I suppose they justify it by "increasing their outreach."

My church is old and property rich (same site for 100 years) and spends its budget every year on its mission, which periodically includes renovating or refreshing the physical plant, which is a combination of very old (90 years) and new buildings, including an auditorium for "rock church" that I dislike and a gym building. The pastor is well-compensated for running a decent sized (15,000 members) corporation, but he's not going to get rich.  When it found a need for other locations to increase outreach, it founded at least two other freestanding Methodist churches further north, which now have their own sizable congregations and has now turned its attention south to revitalize a formerly robust church in a deteriorated part of town.

Also, I am highly suspicious of any "congregational" church that does not answer to a higher earthly authority for matters doctrinal and financial.  Congregations on their own have a tendency to get up to the devil, so to speak.  And, other than the Catholic Church, most of the ones that are highly offensive are congregational.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I suppose one should make a distinction between a rich preacher and a rich church.  Neither is entirely (or at all) consistent with fundamental tenets of Christianity, as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity, but a preacher moreso than a church.

Both bother me. I have always felt that way. When I see the TD Jakes of the world wearing 3k suits and meanwhile your congregation has members who are struggling to just pay their bills and afford food it angers me.

Jesus was a poor man who preached about helping others. He had nothing of monetary value so I feel pretty certain he would be shunned completely by most denominations. 

The prosperity gospel preachers as a whole are just inherently evil human beings. Screw the lot of them. I 100 percent support taxing churches. 

Edited by UpperWestside
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

Both bother me. I have always felt that way. When I see the TD Jakes of the world wearing 3k suits and meanwhile your congregation has members who are struggling to just pay their bills it angers me.

Jesus was a poor man who preached about helping others. He had nothing of monetary value so I feel pretty certain he would be shunned completely by most denominations. 

The prosperity gospel preachers as a whole are just inherently evil human beings. Screw the lot of them. I 100 percent support taxing churches. 

Well, again, using Jakes as an example, most of the rich preachers have some sort of church, but it's a church of, by, and for the preacher, and it is, ta da, congregational.  The church is secondary to its pastor and has no existence outside its current pastor.  The ones that have become property rich over time have, by definition, outlasted at least a half dozen pastors, which Potters House will not, or Young's church, or Osteens. 

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bookman said:

Lol Jesus has nothing to do with Christianity in America. This has been apparent for years. Look at how many “Christians” voted for Donald Trump.

Certain strains of "Christianity," yes.  But you are painting with a mighty broad brush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Well, again, using Jakes as an example, most of the rich preachers have some sort of church, but it's a church of, by, and for the preacher, and it is, ta da, congregational.  The church is secondary to its pastor.

I agree. I went to a smaller Christian university. I do not think I am better than any other man or woman who walks this earth. I do look at those who use God as a way to enrich themselves while stealing from those who have nothing by promising untold riches as being lucifer incarnate. It really hurts my heart to watch it happen.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Certain strains of "Christianity," yes.  But you are painting with a mighty broad brush.

White evangelical "Christians" love the clownshow occupying the White House. The least educated portion of our nation want him there. Those are by and large Christians in name only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, UpperWestside said:

White evangelical "Christians" love the clownshow occupying the White House. The least educated portion of our nation want him there. Those are by and large Christians in name only.

Indeed.  There are large numbers of black and hispanic Christians, many Catholics (gasp), who have never supported Trump.  I think that's true of many white mainstream Protestants, many of whom are as liberal as they come.  Despite all the noise they make, "Evangelical" (read congregational "Christians" who just get to make shit up), are not mainstream Protestants.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Indeed.  There are large numbers of black and hispanic Christians, many Catholics (gasp), who have never supported Trump.  I think that's true of many white mainstream Protestants, many of whom are as liberal as they come.  Despite all the noise they make, "Evangelical" (read congregational "Christians" who just get to make shit up), are not mainstream Protestants.

I do believe it is wise to understand that different ethnic groups of Christians that belong to various denominations, and many white Christians, do not support Dotard. The sooner the white evangelical block of voters holds no sway in this country the better. Barry Goldwater was before my time, but he understood them really well amd what they were going to do if they got unbridled access to power. I just hope future generations remember what is unfolding right now so this disaster of an administration never exists again in a future iteration.

Edited by UpperWestside
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ted Lange said:

OK.  I’m genuinely curious from hearing from the folks that go to churches like 2nd Baptist on their thoughts 

Do they just think Jesus was full of shit?

“Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” 

Maybe if Jesus had someone like Copland to give his seed money to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

 The sooner the white evangelical block of voters holds no sway in this country the better. Barry Goldwater was before my time, but he understood them really well amd what they were going to do if they got unbridled access to power.

The Religious Right (or Moral Majority) came into being as an attempt to protect tax exempt status along with the ability for Christian Colleges to remain segregated. The issue of abortion was not the main focus, in spite of arguments to the contrary. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In many countries, when you register your residency, it asks you to claim your religious affiliation (optional, of course).

What many new residents / immigrants dont realize, is that that information is linked to the tax bureau and thus to payroll.  They get 10% deducted from their pay, automatically.

If you want to stop it, you got to go to the city offices and "formally renounce" your affiliation.

 

Great scam.  Highly recommended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I suppose one should make a distinction between a rich preacher and a rich church.  Neither is entirely (or at all) consistent with fundamental tenets of Christianity, as opposed to fundamentalist Christianity, but a preacher moreso than a church.

 

8 hours ago, Ted Lange said:

Fair.  But how does someone who has read the Bible think the leader of the church should have a helicopter or his wife drive a $300,000 car?

Someone correct me if I am wrong but I believe part of the issue is some rich churches don’t necessarily pay their preacher a huge salary, but they provide exorbitant benefits and use of tax exempt church property such as a huge mansion in Piney Point to live in, expensive cars, and even helicopters and private jets.  So the preacher can live like a billionaire but claim a “modest” salary 

Edited by Horn Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Because people love to give money to support their confirmation bias. 

Yep.

I'm not a fan of those type of preachers, but like Trump, the real blame doesn't fall on them: it falls on those who let them do their thing. 

Don't get mad at a shitbird for being a shitbird if there are measures in place to prevent them from being a shitbird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...