Who Give Two Cents For Christ?

The facts are in: you give two cents for Christ; If you are a regular church-going American you can proudly boast you give two cents out of every dollar for Christ.

In America, prior to the Great Depression, churches were the main source of giving to families and persons in need. In other words funds given to churches through tithes, giving, etc were dispersed in evangelism, missions, aiding local people in need (often called ‘benevolences’) and in feeding the hungry around the world.

But, in 1935 the churches seemed to receive a small windfall through the proclamation of FDR’s New Deal, which encouraged the federal government to give financial and food aid to families in need, otherwise known as AFDC; this program probably provided a little extra money for steeple repairs or pew replacement. 1970 brought sweeping reform to the AFDC program, when the Supreme Court ruled that AFDC was now an entitlement to all Americans; this change allowed a flood of funding for the program, thus alleviating the churches in America of the large burden of caring for the widows, orphans and fatherless.

According to several online resources, 1965 began the trend of Church Building in America spawned by the sudden popularity of Christianity among the younger generation, and a flow of new capital. The 1970's saw a rise in larger and larger church buildings to house these growing congregations. In the 1980's the idea of
church ‘campuses’ began to take hold, with sprawling designs and extensive staffing.

In 2002, churches accounted for $21 billion of the $152 billion spent on nonresidential construction, according to McGraw-Hill, which analyzes the construction industry; and even as overall construction leveled off during the previous five years, church construction continued to rise. However, all of this building is despite church growth stagnation, as average congregation membership has stayed around 45%. In other words, christendom in America loves it’s religion and buildings more that it’s people.

In 1968, 21¢ of every dollar donated was allocated to Benevolences, or helping local families or persons in need. By 2003, 15¢ of every dollar went to Benevolences. Of each additional inflation-adjusted dollar donated to the church between 1968 and 2003, 94¢ went to Congregational Finances.

So, what do churches do with their money? According to EmptyTomb.org: in 1920, the percentage of giving to missions from the total offering was 10.09 percent, just over a dime out of every dollar. In 2003, conservative and evangelical denominations gave 2.6 percent (about three cents per dollar), with the liberals giving only 0.9 percent (one cent). The combined average for overseas evangelical work is about two pennies per dollar.

According to an article by Gene Edward Veith, if church members today actually tithed just 10% of their income, there would be an additional $156 Billion dollars available for Benevolences (caring for families in need), and if just 60% percent of that went to overseas evangelical missions, the $94 Billion dollars would be enough to feed, clothe, medicate and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the entire underdeveloped world.

According to the Bible Jesus had no place to lay His head, however, He was 100% effective in His ministry, His Word, His death, burial and resurrection. In sharp contrast, today’s Christianity is bathed in royal excess. The reality of the situation is “it’s business as usual” at your local modern-church: there is a boast of 'Christ’s love'
but no real evidence of it; all they have to show for their efforts is corporations, buildings and plenty of cash.

They say: “Oh we give to the suffering church and the poor fatherless, widows and orphans and to the preaching of the Gospel...”; yeah, a whopping two pennies’ worth of giving, which is even less than the Pharisees gave.

In other words, the modern christian church in America strains at a gnat and swallows a camel.

“Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.6.But godliness with contentment is great gain. 7.For we brought nothing into [this] world, [and it is] certain we can carry nothing out. 8. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content. 9. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and [into] many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. 10.For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. 11. But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.” 1 Timothy 6:5-11

Bravo! The truth is startling sometimes...yes? Thanks for the info.

We can't really say this is accurate of all churches. The Salvation Army has done more to help the poor than all the others I know of put together. I say this because they helped my family once when I was very young. They never asked for my parents to repay them like the red cross does. In fact they even helped our pastor who was not Salvation Army. In The Light Of Christ;

Mike

Mike, The question is: "Where is the money going?"

It is not going to further the Kingdom, in most cases. If that was the case, groups like the Salvation Army would be preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately these groups no longer preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which is probably why they are so successful in raising money.

Just a little point; here in Farmington, the Salvation Army holds church services every Sunday, and speaks to those who come for food, etc. about Christ. Perhaps not the average SA church, tho. Also, there is a lot of giving that does not go through the churches, but directly to other ministries and organizations, such as the one I currently work for. As far as what the churches do with all the money - ever-increasing salaries, and building projects, mostly, in other words, building their own kingdom instead of God's kingdom, which is sad. The Crystal Cathedral does little for those who don't know where their next meal is coming from. Can't eat all that glass.

If the church spends the majority of its money on itself, is it The Church?

I don't think it is. The Church looks out for the widows, the fatherless, the Brethren in need, and preaches the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

So which are you: a member of The Church, or a member of the false church?

Why does this thread sound like a guilt trip to give more.

Takrill,

More to what? The Church?

If you read my article carefully, you'd have read that The Church, the Body of Christ, the persecuted saints, the widows, the fatherless and the Brethren are NOT being taken care of by today's modern church and chuch-goers. Instead the 'giving' is going to staff salaries and buildings.

So, if you feel guilty, it is no longer due to your own ignorance.

Now how is calling me ignorant going to cause me to give a edifying response?

Would you at least admit in the USA, where these Churches are.

There is no "persecuted saints", the widows, fatherless, and Brethren. Generally have a roof over their head and food in their tummys.
They live like kings compared to many areas of the world.

I will agree many churchs spend way too much on overhead.
However if they wish to spend their blessings on temporal things.
Who are we to tell them no.

Takrill,

The church is not located just in your local city or just here in America, but it is worldwide, and just because we are fat, happy and apathetic here in America does not mean The Church is not suffering, or is not in need.

l suggest you read the article again:

"...if church members today actually tithed just 10% of their income, there would be an additional $156 Billion dollars available for Benevolences (caring for families in need), and if just 60% percent of that went to overseas evangelical missions, the $94 Billion dollars would be enough to feed, clothe, medicate and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the entire underdeveloped world."

I hope this has been enlightening for you.

Thus what I said to start.
Sounds like a guilt trip to give more.

That would be compusion giving, rather than giving from the heart of our free will..

Also another point, where is the faith on God.

If God wanted those missions funded he would provide the funding with out people going around putting on the pressure to give.

I have found many times in my life, when funds came up short. (Sometimes thru my own foolishness) That I trusted God to provide a way. And he did.

The same for all those missions.

If they trusted God, they would not be looking to the fat yankiee dollars,

They would look to God to supply their needs.

Takrill,

Well, let me just clarify, I am not pressuring anyone to give to the modern organized church at all.

But, if you see a Brother in need, you'd better fill the need. If your conscience tells you to tithe, it would go a lot further than to toss it into the coffers of the modern church movement.

Besides, if you were really giving to the Lord why would you feel guilt?

People Give to the church, because they feel what they give is handled in a accounable manner. If they didnt feel that way then they would elect new people in the Church to handle the cash.


It isnt going to buy bags of grain that rot on some dock in Africa.
It isnt going to some fund where 95% of it goes to some con-man.
It isnt going to buy food for some government army that supresses its people.

Now you are saying we should not give to the church, where they are accountable to us but rather to some feed the world groups?

Groups that are outside of the Church, which is the foundation of truth.
Groups that are not personally accountable to us.


Thanks but that is not for me.

Quoted from Steven: "if you were really giving to the Lord why would you feel guilt?"

Because people pressured to give are not giving to the lord, they are giving because they was pressured.

Hi Takkrill

I just wanted to point out that being called ignorant is not an insult. It is an observation that one is unaware of certain information.

So when UP said that if you felt guilty it was NOT due to your ignorance, it was actually, in a sense, a compliment. He was saying that you are now informed, so you cannot blame your feeling of guilt on a lack of knowledge.

I hope this helps alleviate any "ignorance" on what that comment meant

God bless

Good Point. Thanks for bringing clarity to the subject.