Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,247
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 29, 2017 9:22:09 GMT -5
Whoa, whoa, it's not "my" belief. It just seems to be the argument that comes up whenever the government is ham-handed in its response to a disaster--"big government is bad, the church can do it better." Same with food stamps, Section 8, and other needs of the poor--"not with my money, charity will take care of them." I don't subscribe to either of those beliefs, personally... but regardless, tweeting that you're collecting donations on your website and that your church might accept displaced people "after the shelters are full" is just bad optics. I agree tweeting about gathering financial donations looks bad. He and the congregation probably should have started up ideas about collecting needed items and planning distribution to the community. the flooding to the property might be largely invisible outside the building. Perhaps all that rain has drained into basement areas on the property. He's not part of the government is bad, we will do better movement. Why then, should he and his congregation have to live up to ideals they do not hold?
Found some pics on Snopes, have no idea if they are accurate or not. www.snopes.com/is-osteens-megachurch-affected/
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 29, 2017 9:34:03 GMT -5
The Snopes article mentions that Osteen lives in a $10.5 million home. I have no idea who he is so it's entirely possible he is a retired inventor or inherited wealth or somehow made his fortune outside the ministry... but if none of that is the case, it's amazing that this hasn't been a public issue.
We frequently hear of outrage over CEO compensation. Most of the companies with the highly paid CEOs are for-profit enterprises that are paying taxes on their operations. It seems odd that:
1) There hadn't been a public outcry about excessive compensation for religious leaders, especially since those are organizations that not only operate free of taxes but provide individual donors a tax deduction for their donation.
2) Who the heck donates to organizations which clearly use the donations to provide royal living to the leaders? BTW, that issue is not just with this church, but with multiple religious organizations from the Catholic church to the Church of Scientology.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,247
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 29, 2017 9:45:59 GMT -5
The schools, universities and other complexes are not set up to provide disaster recover either. But that does not stop them from offering relief. Neither does it stop other religious congregations. Just this year in February the Sikh Gurudwaras in California opened their doors to victims of Oroville Dam emergency. www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Sikhs-Step-Up-Welcome-Oroville-Dam-Evacuees-in-Their-Temples-413708923.htmlBut its just soooooo hard for the Lakewood Church to do the same. Even with more resources, more money, more space, more everything. That's great, but just a quick read showed me the Sikh temples were an hour away from the disaster, not in the middle of it. I don't think those who are angry about this will be satisfied with an offer of one meal and a sleep on the church floor simply because their expectations are out of line with reality.
Schools, Universities, and convention centers should have better infrastructure than a church especially in regards to feeding people. Schools usually feed their populations one sometimes two meals a day. I know of no church that actually does one meal in house, i.e. those that do a meal usually have it done by congregation members bringing in the food. The kitchen is only used for reheating and prep. Not making everything from what's stored on site in the pantries and fridge. But that's what schools and some convention centers do.
I don't get how Lakewood has all these resources except lots of space that maybe on top of flooded basements.
|
|
busymom
Distinguished Associate
Why is the rum always gone? Oh...that's why.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 21:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 29,251
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://cdn.nickpic.host/images/IPauJ5.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0D317F
Mini-Profile Text Color: 0D317F
|
Post by busymom on Aug 29, 2017 9:54:25 GMT -5
DH & I are members of a small church. The mortgage on it isn't yet paid off, but our church DOES help our community. There was a food shelf for a time, until the pastor discovered some recipients were just throwing out the canned goods (in the church dumpster, yet!) that they didn't want as they were leaving with their bags of food. Now, when we find a family in need, they simply get gift cards, so they can go buy whatever food they want.
The point is, our congregation is small, but they do SOMETHING. Everyone is capable of doing something. And, a "rich" church, with healthy giving by it's congregation, should be able to do something. Even if they don't open the doors, they could be giving out, for example, cases of water, diapers, etc.
|
|
swasat
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 13, 2011 9:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 3,735
|
Post by swasat on Aug 29, 2017 9:54:26 GMT -5
The schools, universities and other complexes are not set up to provide disaster recover either. But that does not stop them from offering relief. Neither does it stop other religious congregations. Just this year in February the Sikh Gurudwaras in California opened their doors to victims of Oroville Dam emergency. www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Sikhs-Step-Up-Welcome-Oroville-Dam-Evacuees-in-Their-Temples-413708923.htmlBut its just soooooo hard for the Lakewood Church to do the same. Even with more resources, more money, more space, more everything. That's great, but just a quick read showed me the Sikh temples were an hour away from the disaster, not in the middle of it. I don't think those who are angry about this will be satisfied with an offer of one meal and a sleep on the church floor simply because their expectations are out of line with reality.
Schools, Universities, and convention centers should have better infrastructure than a church especially in regards to feeding people. Schools usually feed their populations one sometimes two meals a day. I know of no church that actually does one meal in house, i.e. those that do a meal usually have it done by congregation members bringing in the food. The kitchen is only used for reheating and prep. Not making everything from what's stored on site in the pantries and fridge. But that's what schools and some convention centers do.
I don't get how Lakewood has all these resources except lots of space that maybe on top of flooded basements.
LOTS of schools do not have cooking kitchens. Its reheat and serve only. Listen, you and I can argue ad nauseum. You haven't seen Lakewood Church kitchens, neither have I. SO we can't say for sure what could or could not be done. However, the church has offered no assistance to anyone. Even shelter. I refuse to believe that a congregation 16000 members strong could not arrange for shelter and food for victims. Its take, take take some more and PRAY for the victims to fulfill their duties. And with that I am done arguing with you about Osteen or his church. He is a jerk.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Aug 29, 2017 10:01:31 GMT -5
Osteen's church practices prosperity theology which is BS. Oh well then this all makes sense. It would be a bad idea to host a bunch of smelly poor people since their lack of prosperity would rub off on the church. Obviously I'm just being snarky with that. I have no idea what prosperity theology is any more than I know how Osteen made his money. I can see both sides of the issue of hosting refugees. I was raised deeply involved in a church and then served as a church council member (similar to a Deacon or being a board member), so have had a close up look at the good, bad and ugly.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,247
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Aug 29, 2017 10:02:12 GMT -5
Memories from Floyd. I had no city water for at least a week and I think a brief power outage. Flooding and power outages that are too long require grocery stores, etc. to be recertified. Back then, the national guard shutdown the local Walmart and grocery store. It did not open for days to the public after the initial flooding. Everything needed to be recertified.
|
|
alabamagal
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 11:30:29 GMT -5
Posts: 8,148
|
Post by alabamagal on Aug 29, 2017 10:07:43 GMT -5
I don't care for the guy or megachurches. My one in-law who follows the guy is a hot mess.
But unless you know what is going on in the neighborhood where the church is located, I wouldn't be too quick to criticize.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Aug 29, 2017 10:16:39 GMT -5
I am not a fan of mega churches personally..........but for MILEE: I believe Osteen takes no salary or income from the church. His assets and income comes from his book sales. So not exactly a good comparison to the over paid, glad handing, "I did not know about that till I read it in the paper", "gee I dont understand accounting so how could I have known", the buck stops somewhere below me, modern CEO. It's actually a pretty good way to maintain the facade if what you say is...take no money from the church but hawk your books to the believers for 29.95 a pop. Wonder if they have to pay for his tv time or if they get paid and if so does that go to the church or him.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 29, 2017 10:22:19 GMT -5
Whoa, whoa, it's not "my" belief. It just seems to be the argument that comes up whenever the government is ham-handed in its response to a disaster--"big government is bad, the church can do it better." Same with food stamps, Section 8, and other needs of the poor--"not with my money, charity will take care of them." I don't subscribe to either of those beliefs, personally... but regardless, tweeting that you're collecting donations on your website and that your church might accept displaced people "after the shelters are full" is just bad optics. There's a world of difference between charities set up to accomplish specific functions, and "a church" in general. A charity set up to provide food to hungry families is set up to do exactly that. A church which is set up to provide a place for followers of a specific religion is not necessarily in the business of also providing food to hungry families.
I might have missed it, but I don't remember reading much (if any) beliefs that people who think the government is poor at running social services that "church" is the answer to it rather than charities specifically set up to help in certain situations. Churches tend to a better job at helping their own congregation than helping "society" at large for social services.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 29, 2017 10:31:21 GMT -5
I don't care for the guy or megachurches. My one in-law who follows the guy is a hot mess. But unless you know what is going on in the neighborhood where the church is located, I wouldn't be too quick to criticize. Pictures were posted online by the church that it was flooded. Immediately afterwards, pictures were posted that it was not, and even the loading dock (which was underground) was clear of water. Hell, there is a furniture store in Houston that opened its doors to displaced people (as well as smaller churches and mosques with far fewer resources). I'm guessing there are few bathrooms and little to no food service facilities, yet THEY are giving people a place to stay.
|
|
swasat
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 13, 2011 9:34:28 GMT -5
Posts: 3,735
|
Post by swasat on Aug 29, 2017 10:36:14 GMT -5
I am not a fan of mega churches personally..........but for MILEE: I believe Osteen takes no salary or income from the church. His assets and income comes from his book sales. So not exactly a good comparison to the over paid, glad handing, "I did not know about that till I read it in the paper", "gee I dont understand accounting so how could I have known", the buck stops somewhere below me, modern CEO. He used to make $200,000 in salary from the church. Till as recently as 2005. So yes, he made a TON of money from that church of his. heavy.com/entertainment/2017/08/joel-osteen-net-worth-salary-books-church-books-how-much-money/
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Aug 29, 2017 10:38:32 GMT -5
Shouldn't that be the reason the church is there--to help people in need? The primary purpose of a church is to preach the gospel. If a church doesn't do that it's just another eleemosynary institution. Most of them do plenty to support the community, too, but their outreach ministries are structured and built around resources they have available (people, expertise, money). I spend nearly every Saturday morning ruining my nails, weeding a garden that supplies produce to the local community kitchen, aided by kids doing community service as part of their probation. Today I'm working the blood drive at church. We're perpetually collecting supplies for back-to-school, for snacks the teachers can give hungry kids, for household goods people can't buy with EBT (food stamp) cards. Our sanctuary holds 300 (sadly, attendance is nowhere near that) and we have 7 toilet stalls and a small kitchen. Could we take in, say, 200 people and feed and house them for weeks and help them find new places to live? No. We don't have a lot of money because many of my fellow members are struggling financially and we certainly don't have the expertise to manage such an undertaking. Apparently, your understanding of the gospel and mine are two different things.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 29, 2017 10:53:03 GMT -5
I don't care for the guy or megachurches. My one in-law who follows the guy is a hot mess. But unless you know what is going on in the neighborhood where the church is located, I wouldn't be too quick to criticize. Pictures were posted online by the church that it was flooded. Immediately afterwards, pictures were posted that it was not, and even the loading dock (which was underground) was clear of water. Hell, there is a furniture store in Houston that opened its doors to displaced people (as well as smaller churches and mosques with far fewer resources). I'm guessing there are few bathrooms and little to no food service facilities, yet THEY are giving people a place to stay. From a logistical perspective, I can see how it would be MUCH easier to open a small church or furniture store or whatever to people than it would be to open a 15,000 seat arena. I could very easily go open my garage to folks I heard about who needed help, I couldn't open up a school gymnasium nearly as easily.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 22,166
|
Post by giramomma on Aug 29, 2017 10:56:33 GMT -5
2) Who the heck donates to organizations which clearly use the donations to provide royal living to the leaders? BTW, that issue is not just with this church, but with multiple religious organizations from the Catholic church to the Church of Scientology. We do. But, it's part of our contract with sending our kids to Catholic School. We also have to serve the church somehow (outside of volunteering at our kids' school) as part of our contractual obligations. I don't donate to the dioceses, however. I will donate directly to non-profits that may be associated with our diocese. Our church runs a community center (that the dioceses, at one point shut down.) One of the organizations housed in the community center is a pregnancy crisis center. We usually donate diapers/new baby clothes to the pregnancy crisis center during respect life month at our church. Our priests do not live high on the hog. The church does own two houses for priests, nuns, etc to live in. They are small, typical post WW-2 houses. Our monsignor drives a small sedan. I know our Bishop leads a different lifestyle...but I just ignore that. Most of us know that our Bishop does not model good behavior..but I think you see that in folks of any sort of leadership position..whether it's in religion or in the secular world.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 29, 2017 10:58:05 GMT -5
Shouldn't that be the reason the church is there--to help people in need? The primary purpose of a church is to preach the gospel. If a church doesn't do that it's just another eleemosynary institution. Most of them do plenty to support the community, too, but their outreach ministries are structured and built around resources they have available (people, expertise, money). I spend nearly every Saturday morning ruining my nails, weeding a garden that supplies produce to the local community kitchen, aided by kids doing community service as part of their probation. Today I'm working the blood drive at church. We're perpetually collecting supplies for back-to-school, for snacks the teachers can give hungry kids, for household goods people can't buy with EBT (food stamp) cards. Our sanctuary holds 300 (sadly, attendance is nowhere near that) and we have 7 toilet stalls and a small kitchen. Could we take in, say, 200 people and feed and house them for weeks and help them find new places to live? No. We don't have a lot of money because many of my fellow members are struggling financially and we certainly don't have the expertise to manage such an undertaking. If you consider that they have a pretty substantial schedule where they actually feed people (according to the ads I just looked at), I'm guessing that there are kitchen facilities of some sort. Supporting the bathroom habits of a congregation of nearly 17,000 means that they have enough restroom facilities as those of a smaller stadium. No one is looking to support them for weeks, that is the purpose of FEMA and the Red Cross. But as a way station until they can get other help IS a reasonable expectation of a church.....and one that much smaller churches are already providing.
|
|
emma1420
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2011 15:35:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,430
|
Post by emma1420 on Aug 29, 2017 11:24:36 GMT -5
Osteen's church practices prosperity theology which is BS. Oh well then this all makes sense. It would be a bad idea to host a bunch of smelly poor people since their lack of prosperity would rub off on the church. Obviously I'm just being snarky with that. I have no idea what prosperity theology is any more than I know how Osteen made his money. I can see both sides of the issue of hosting refugees. I was raised deeply involved in a church and then served as a church council member (similar to a Deacon or being a board member), so have had a close up look at the good, bad and ugly. Prosperity theology is basically the belief that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for people, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one's material wealth. It's a load of crap. And to me it's dangerous because it promotes the idea that only good people end up wealthy. Which is about as far from the truth as possible. But, then I feel like a lot of religious crap is dangerous. As for Osteen and his church. It doesn't surprise me that he's not going to open his doors. I also don't see Osteen pledging money to the Red Cross (or similar organizations) or him and any of his followers, not impacted by the flooding, volunteering and offering help to the victims. Because in my mind that is one of the few worthwhile things the bible talked about. Helping others even when you didn't need to.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 29, 2017 11:31:07 GMT -5
Oh well then this all makes sense. It would be a bad idea to host a bunch of smelly poor people since their lack of prosperity would rub off on the church. Obviously I'm just being snarky with that. I have no idea what prosperity theology is any more than I know how Osteen made his money. I can see both sides of the issue of hosting refugees. I was raised deeply involved in a church and then served as a church council member (similar to a Deacon or being a board member), so have had a close up look at the good, bad and ugly. Prosperity theology is basically the belief that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for people, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one's material wealth. It's a load of crap. And to me it's dangerous because it promotes the idea that only good people end up wealthy. Which is about as far from the truth as possible. But, then I feel like a lot of religious crap is dangerous. As for Osteen and his church. It doesn't surprise me that he's not going to open his doors. I also don't see Osteen pledging money to the Red Cross (or similar organizations) or him and any of his followers, not impacted by the flooding, volunteering and offering help to the victims. Because in my mind that is one of the few worthwhile things the bible talked about. Helping others even when you didn't need to.This is just me, but when I volunteer for stuff, I don't often tell anyone where I work, what church I go to, etc. Same goes for donating money, I don't give the receivers a rundown of all groups I might be affiliated with to publish in a news story.
|
|
emma1420
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2011 15:35:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,430
|
Post by emma1420 on Aug 29, 2017 11:41:37 GMT -5
Prosperity theology is basically the belief that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for people, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one's material wealth. It's a load of crap. And to me it's dangerous because it promotes the idea that only good people end up wealthy. Which is about as far from the truth as possible. But, then I feel like a lot of religious crap is dangerous. As for Osteen and his church. It doesn't surprise me that he's not going to open his doors. I also don't see Osteen pledging money to the Red Cross (or similar organizations) or him and any of his followers, not impacted by the flooding, volunteering and offering help to the victims. Because in my mind that is one of the few worthwhile things the bible talked about. Helping others even when you didn't need to.This is just me, but when I volunteer for stuff, I don't often tell anyone where I work, what church I go to, etc. Same goes for donating money, I don't give the receivers a rundown of all groups I might be affiliated with to publish in a news story. I don't either. But, I also think for these mega churches it's generally pretty obvious, and many of them are media whores and so make sure that the word gets out.
|
|
dannylion
Junior Associate
Gravity is a harsh mistress
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:17:52 GMT -5
Posts: 5,214
Location: Miles over the madness horizon and accelerating
|
Post by dannylion on Aug 29, 2017 11:44:37 GMT -5
Shocking. I'm shocked. So shocking. Asshole. LOL! I was about to post almost the identical comment.
Can't have all those damp people messing up the fancy church. And they're probably mostly poor and not likely to make a "donation" to further the "work" of his fancy "church" (which mostly seems to be to fund his extravagant lifestyle and hair care).
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Aug 29, 2017 12:18:40 GMT -5
Oh well then this all makes sense. It would be a bad idea to host a bunch of smelly poor people since their lack of prosperity would rub off on the church. Obviously I'm just being snarky with that. I have no idea what prosperity theology is any more than I know how Osteen made his money. I can see both sides of the issue of hosting refugees. I was raised deeply involved in a church and then served as a church council member (similar to a Deacon or being a board member), so have had a close up look at the good, bad and ugly. Prosperity theology is basically the belief that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for people, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one's material wealth. It's a load of crap. And to me it's dangerous because it promotes the idea that only good people end up wealthy. Which is about as far from the truth as possible. But, then I feel like a lot of religious crap is dangerous. As for Osteen and his church. It doesn't surprise me that he's not going to open his doors. I also don't see Osteen pledging money to the Red Cross (or similar organizations) or him and any of his followers, not impacted by the flooding, volunteering and offering help to the victims. Because in my mind that is one of the few worthwhile things the bible talked about. Helping others even when you didn't need to. Not to mention that it is the antithesis of what the guy they're supposedly following was teaching. Probably what got him killed, actually.
|
|
kittensaver
Junior Associate
We cannot do great things. We can only do small things with great love. - Mother Teresa
Joined: Nov 22, 2011 16:16:36 GMT -5
Posts: 7,983
|
Post by kittensaver on Aug 29, 2017 12:20:03 GMT -5
Well, he's opened his doors now, apparently.
Too bad it took public shaming to make it happen.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 29, 2017 12:45:48 GMT -5
Well, he's opened his doors now, apparently.
Too bad it took public shaming to make it happen. Exactly. Had he not been called out on it, it wouldn't have crossed his mind. Better late than never.
|
|
Gardening Grandma
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:39:46 GMT -5
Posts: 17,962
|
Post by Gardening Grandma on Aug 29, 2017 13:08:38 GMT -5
Oh well then this all makes sense. It would be a bad idea to host a bunch of smelly poor people since their lack of prosperity would rub off on the church. Obviously I'm just being snarky with that. I have no idea what prosperity theology is any more than I know how Osteen made his money. I can see both sides of the issue of hosting refugees. I was raised deeply involved in a church and then served as a church council member (similar to a Deacon or being a board member), so have had a close up look at the good, bad and ugly. Prosperity theology is basically the belief that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for people, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one's material wealth. It's a load of crap. And to me it's dangerous because it promotes the idea that only good people end up wealthy. Which is about as far from the truth as possible. But, then I feel like a lot of religious crap is dangerous. As for Osteen and his church. It doesn't surprise me that he's not going to open his doors. I also don't see Osteen pledging money to the Red Cross (or similar organizations) or him and any of his followers, not impacted by the flooding, volunteering and offering help to the victims. Because in my mind that is one of the few worthwhile things the bible talked about. Helping others even when you didn't need to. It's a load of crap. And to me it's dangerous because it promotes the idea that only good people end up wealthy. Which is about as far from the truth as possible. It goes hand in hand with poor shameing.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 15, 2024 9:29:35 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2017 13:34:29 GMT -5
I am not a fan of mega churches personally..........but for MILEE: I believe Osteen takes no salary or income from the church. His assets and income comes from his book sales. So not exactly a good comparison to the over paid, glad handing, "I did not know about that till I read it in the paper", "gee I dont understand accounting so how could I have known", the buck stops somewhere below me, modern CEO. He stopped taking his 200k salary when his other income streams became 'enough'...
|
|
dannylion
Junior Associate
Gravity is a harsh mistress
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 12:17:52 GMT -5
Posts: 5,214
Location: Miles over the madness horizon and accelerating
|
Post by dannylion on Aug 29, 2017 13:53:54 GMT -5
It remains to be seen just exactly how much real help that weasel's organization provides now that he's been shamed into doing something.
In other news, it seems the Kardashians have donated half a million dollars to Harvey relief.
Yeah, it's probably a publicity move, but who cares? It will actually help people.
Go figure. Carny people behaving more decently than a "man of god."
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 15, 2024 9:29:35 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2017 14:22:30 GMT -5
Apparently, your understanding of the gospel and mine are two different things. If the primary purpose of the church is to exhort its members to do good works, how does that make it any different from, say, Rotary International other than occupying a more expensive building and being open on Sunday. I have to admit that I'm heavily influenced by a book DS loaned me recently (The Gospel of Paul) but faith is the primary purpose. Good works follow. BTW, many of these spaces, including churches, have adequate toilets but zero showers or bathtubs and no laundry facilities. Think about that.
|
|
saveinla
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 2:00:29 GMT -5
Posts: 5,279
|
Post by saveinla on Aug 29, 2017 14:30:24 GMT -5
Apparently, your understanding of the gospel and mine are two different things. If the primary purpose of the church is to exhort its members to do good works, how does that make it any different from, say, Rotary International other than occupying a more expensive building and being open on Sunday. I have to admit that I'm heavily influenced by a book DS loaned me recently (The Gospel of Paul) but faith is the primary purpose. Good works follow. BTW, many of these spaces, including churches, have adequate toilets but zero showers or bathtubs and no laundry facilities. Think about that. Nobody is talking about long term shelter - just a respite for a couple of days until the flooding is over. It does not matter that it is a church or a gym - it's just a huge space that is not flooded unlike other areas.
|
|
justme
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 10, 2012 13:12:47 GMT -5
Posts: 14,618
|
Post by justme on Aug 29, 2017 14:32:47 GMT -5
Most of not all of the places any of those displaced are staying don't have adequate facilities for long term living - still didn't stop them from housing them.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Aug 29, 2017 16:12:44 GMT -5
Apparently, your understanding of the gospel and mine are two different things. If the primary purpose of the church is to exhort its members to do good works, how does that make it any different from, say, Rotary International other than occupying a more expensive building and being open on Sunday. I have to admit that I'm heavily influenced by a book DS loaned me recently (The Gospel of Paul) but faith is the primary purpose. Good works follow. BTW, many of these spaces, including churches, have adequate toilets but zero showers or bathtubs and no laundry facilities. Think about that. They probably have better facilities than the furniture store that opened its doors to the displaced public. I'm guessing that their shower and laundry facilities are nil, but they've found a way of making it work. www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/furniture-stores-turned-into-shelters_us_59a57622e4b0446b3b867b49?utm_campaign=hp_fb_pages&utm_source=gn_fb&utm_medium=facebook&ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000023
|
|