Sunday, September 02, 2007


I came across this post after scouring through my comments section.

It deals with the idea of fundraising at churches. I have had a problem with it for years. To drive by a church and see a "yard sale" on the front lawn of the church just kills the idea of what church is about.
The other posts on this site are also very good so give it a look.


andy said...

In the UK the proverbial C of E jumble sell was pretty common and rather quaint,i think it depends on what their fundrasing for..

In the USA some Church budgets (or debts)seem stunning,multi million buildings with youth sport facilities, that rival what schools have here!

In the UK fundrasing can be a great way to fund much needed restoration or just finance the basic's seats heating etc..

andy said...

DT i think its relative..A bunch of old ladies rallying together to hold a jumble sale for the church spire,to me is rather quaint..

I guess it depend on the spirit of the occasion and what their collecting for.andy

Dead Theologians said...


Do we really need the world's (unsaved) money? Churches should budget their money to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of the church before the money goes to entertainment.

In the end, what is the purpose of the church? To raise money for events or to preach Christ and exhort the saints?


Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

It is unscriptural for churches to borrow money, period. The interest goes to support the very issues we are against. Again, it's the American way.

Dead Theologians said...


What about fundraisers?

Though I am a GA. fan I have to say "GO TECH!"


Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

We suffer persecution joyfully!

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Asking for money for projects is OK as long as there are no promises attached.

andy said...

Hi DT i agree to a point..Maybe i'm shaded by the very quiant view of fundraising in the UK i.e we need a new spire,or the roofs leaking,old woman making apple pies to be judged haha..

andy said...

Go Tech??? I'm presuming thats about American Football,if thats the case my best friend Melissa would string me up for not shouting Go Vols ;-)

approvedworkman said...

The churches need to support themselves and if there is a surplus, help support good ministry, and/or churches that are struggling. I have seen churches selling bonds and such things. Not good at all.

Rick you probably didn't say enough Hail Mary's or go to novena. It is "notre dame "after all.
If you are going to go catholic, you must make it a total committment! :)
Actually my mother was Notre Dame fan and most of family are still closet Notre Dame fans.

iggy said...

Sports are of the devil and designed to waste our time away from saving souls... unless they are for fundraisers and take the devils money to be used for saving souls...

Now... I hope at least I got a smile from some of you!

Be Blessed,

iggy said...


I see that it is all God's money... and there is not "saved" money and "unsaved" money... it is just a neutral monetary devise.

To that we have a responsibility to use it for the Kingdom and to better the lives of those around us.

I have gone to churches that have "sales" and really never thought about whether i would go to that church or not for that reason... I usually look for more important things than if they are selling someones donated junk... though in Montana I could have bought a couple of good rifles. : )

Be Blessed,

dsstanfield said...

Hello all. I hope everyone had a blessed Lord's Day yesterday!

O.k... I have to throw this out there on the table. (Sorry Henry, rick.) If churches today would teach that the Old Testament laws that have been unfulfilled are still binding, then our tithes of 10% with our offerings would render church fundraising unnecessary.

Hmmm.. Behind door number one: we have God's way (Tithes), Behind door number two: Man's way (Fundraising).

Drumroll please.........I choose.... Door Number 1.

Here is a great quote by Rushdoony:

"The work of the Lord is not honored where financial drives are necessary, door to door canvassing, or extensive pleading to gain support. The Kingdom of God is not a beggar's agency: it is the realm and majesty of the Most High God. We receive in return His blessing, government, and care. If we do not pay our taxes (tithes) and gifts, we receive His judgment and curse. God's work must be supported God's way."

Dead Theologians said...


I just wonder how close we are to turning the church into a temple doing business (buying and selling).

I cannot find in scripture where the church was to become a hub of activity such as sports, daycare, preschool, raffle/bingo hall, workout gym and etc.

Then I have those that say "Well, I would rather my kid be at church playing ball than on the street." That is not what the church is for.


Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

ds - An appeal for funds was given by Paul, so the term fundraising gives the wrong impression. Tithing is not taught in the New Testament, it isn't mentioned in the epistles, and even when Paul told the Corinthians to have the offering ready so he wouldn't have to take one, but he never called them the tithe either in chapter 16 or 9.

And yet in churches that believe in tithing they mention it every time the offering is taken. tithing is not found anywhere in the New Testament except where it applies to its observance in the Old Testament (Hebrews). No teaching = no observance.

Dead Theologians said...


I would be careful about saying
"No teaching = no observance"

That could get a little crazy.


Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Of course we do not observe things that are not taught in the New Testament. Do you eat shellfish? Adventists don't because they observe the law. If it is not explicitly taught to the church in the New Testament it is not to be observed.

Do you observe the Day of Atonement? The Feast of Unleavened Bread? no teaching = no obseravance.

dsstanfield said...

Good morning Henry (rick) and DT,

Henry (rick),

Once again, your Dispensationalism strikes. Have you ever studied any other "system of interpretation?" After all, Dispensationalism has only been around and accepted for about the last 170 years or so.

I would say that the New Testament not only assumes the Law of God and presupposes it, but cites it repeatedly to make its points. Look to Pauls great argument in Romans 3:31. He is not making the Law void, but establishing it. Paul often cites the Law as his authority, especially to the Corinthians (I Cor. 7:39, 9:8f; 14:21, 34).

What about Matthew 23:23 and Luke 11:42? Jesus condemns the scribes and Pharisees for assuming that tithing will save them. he calls them "hypocrites," and says "THESE OUGHT YE TO HAVE DONE" but not to forgo obedience to "the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith."

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

The only reference is the one you quote which was mad not to reinforce tithing but to teach the hollowness of lawful obedience without observing faith and mercy which of course were coming. To say that that refernce teaches tithing for the post Pentecost church is extreme hermeneutics.

Paul, Peter, John, never mention it and Paul doesn't even refer to it ever in the verses where he deals with giving. Why not? All churches that believe in tithing do not observe the feasts, or abstain from shell fish, or observe all the other things taught in the law.

Please provide me with the New Testament teaching that divides the different parts of the law, the ones we are to observe and the ones we do not. You wished everyone a good Lord's day, why do you not worship on the day commanded by the fourth commandment, nowhere in the New Testament does it teach you can change it if you arestill under the law.

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

ds - the more recent availability of truth does not have any bearing on its accuracy, since the same point is made by the Roman Church to discount the reformation.

Also, to label ones perspective such as "dispensationalism" is meant to subliminally diminish it from a perspective of superiority. I could just as well have labelled your perspective as legalism which not only gives the impression I am all too well familiar with you view, but I've given it a name which usually is passed around the agreeable crowd.

People do the same when they call us "free willers" - "grace-niks" - "pelagians" - "semi-pelagians" and others. So the labelling serves only to reinforce ones opposing position as unbiblical.

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

"All churches that believe in tithing do not observe the feasts, or abstain from shell fish, or observe all the other things taught in the law."

The feasts in the Old Testament pointed people towards Jesus Christ, the Messiah. Now that we have Him and His full revelation in the New Testament, they are no longer necessary. They are considered ceremonial feasts and are no longer binding.

Matthew teaches in 15:11, "Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man."

Jesus stated "Are you thus without understanding also? Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?"

Here we have the dietary laws abrogated. Jesus is showing here that the Jews failed to understand the underlying principle of the Law...which is separation and holiness.

We celebrate the Lord's Day on the first day of every week as was set before us by Christ resurrecting on the first day and by apostolic example. I would think that is proof enough. Does the Fourth Commandment ever state to worship on Saturday? No, it states six days shalt thou labor...

Let me reiterate. As Christians we are not under the Law. Grace and Law are both covenantal. God's covenant is a covenant of grace because for Him to enter into a covenant with man is an act of grace from the superior to the inferior. A covenant is also a treaty of Law, whereby the greater (God) tells the lesser (man) how to live under His care and protection. By rejecting God's Law, we are ultimately guilty of rejecting his grace. God gave us His law for our good.

What do you think the source of Law should be for the United States?

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

"What do you think the source of Law should be for the United States? "

To say I do not care would be an understatement. Any observance of their laws is just a subset of the kingdom of which I am a citizenship. I do not have duel citizenship.

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick):

What do you think of the following:

"Can there be a free society, the professed goal of modern men, when God's perfect law of liberty is despised? How free can any society be when it drops God's Ten Commandments, and the whole body of His law? It is no accident that the Western World, no longer Christendom, is moving into statist tyranny."

Humanistic law means tyranny, whereas God's law is liberty. God's law cannot expand: it is a limited body of legislation, and, in much of the law, God reserves the right of judgment to Himself. Thus, little is left to man's discretion, if anything.

God's Law for the U.S., or fallen man's Law,

Henry (rick).... which would you prefer?

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

If you assume the constitution mirrors God's law then you have a different view than do I. The American government was created by man, run by man, and refined by man. The concept of government is the Lord's, but democracy was invented by the humanistic Greeks.

In essence it is man governing man, and in 2007 you have, well:


A nation filled with abortion, gays, murder, greed, lies, power, adultery, and the spirit of anti-Christ!

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

I care nothing for democracy either, either in the nation or in the church, as it is nothing more than the "mob ruling." In our day and time, the mob is anti-christian.

The Constitution is not a Christian document (although it does contain some Christian ideas). The state wrongly derives its power from the people and not from God.

We the People...

What about a Theocracy, where God and His Laws rule? I am going to repeat my question to you Henry (rick), would you rather have God's Law governing this country and you, or fallen man's humanistic laws?

"One of the most important prophecies concerning the birth of our Lord is in Isaiah 9:6–7. Christ, eight centuries before His coming, is hailed as the 'Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, the everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace,' and it is declared that 'the government shall be upon his shoulder.' This is the first great declaration concerning Christ and all government: the ultimate and absolute government of all things shall belong to Christ. The second great declaration is that 'of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end.' Christ, coming into a sinful and rebellious world to establish His dominion as Lord and Savior, will in the face of all enmity and warfare increase His power, government, and peace.

Next, we are told exactly how this shall be done: He shall 'establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever,' or, as the Berkeley Version translates it, “it is firmly established and supported in justice and righteousness from now on and forever.”

Christ came into the world as the great prophet, priest, and king. As prophet, He speaks for God; as priest, He is man’s savior and advocate with the Father; as king, He rules over the world.

The world is in rebellion against that government. From these rebels and revolutionists, we hear much talk about 'peace,' and a great deal of hostility to government. But Isaiah tied the two together: 'Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end.' True peace, in other words, is a product of true government. When there is true law and order, then there is also true peace. Abolish law and order, and you abolish peace and create a situation of revolutionary warfare and anarchy. By abandoning Christ as Savior and King, by abandoning His government and peace, we are moving into a world of perpetual warfare. We are engaged in 'perpetual warfare for perpetual peace' because we are seeking it without Christ."

This is my point. We have all this:

"A nation filled with abortion, gays, murder, greed, lies, power, adultery, and the spirit of anti-Christ!"

because we have forsaken God's Law....

My family and I are on our way out the door. We are attending a cook out at one of our elder's homes. Over a beer or two (now you know where I stand on the alcohol issue) and some grilled burgers, I am sure that we are going to have some great theological discussions.

I look forward to reading your answer to my question. I'll be back later!


Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

I believe fallen man's laws are governing this country. And suggestion that are laws reflect Christ are incredulous.Christ's kingdom is not of this world, it dwells in the hearts of every believer. So the lost governments are man's attempt to govern himself.

Your observation that we haven't followed God's laws is right on, we never attempted to. Jefferson and others made sure the constitution reflected humanism that inadvertantly used some moral laws in the Bible. They purposely constructed a non-religous government, suggestions to the contrary notwithstanding.

Last year at the United Nations the president of Iran prayed to Allah before he ever spoke, praying for the coming of the invisible imam.

President Bush also spoke and never mention God much less Jesus.

Iran is more of a religious nation than we are.

dsstanfield said...

Good Morning Henry (rick),

"Christ's kingdom is not of this world, it dwells in the hearts of every believer. So the lost governments are man's attempt to govern himself."

Christ's kingdom is physical as well. How else could we pray in the Lord's Prayer:

Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, ON EARTH (not just in our hearts) as it is IN HEAVEN....

Bush is a Universalist at best. Iran is more religious. I agree.

In our sermon Sunday (we are at the end of the book of Hebrews), we learned about the three spheres of government that God ordained:

1. church
2. family
3. state

At the head of all three, one should find King Jesus!

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

God's physical kingdom will only materialize when He comes back. Until then the church and family will sorta be under his authority.


dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

We are off topic again. Sorry DT. This will be my last post concerning this.

"Until then the church and family will sorta be under his authority."

Jesus said in Matthew 28: "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

Anonymous said...

Henry (rick),
I've been reading for a little while now and it has been sad to see how little hope you seem to have. Christ is ruling and reigning now! He is victorious! If a person doesn't have this view why would they care about this world and what happens in it? Why would they bring children into this world? Wouldn't they just continually wring their hands and say "Come quickly, Lord Jesus."?

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

If Christ is ruling and reigning now then why is He coming back to do the same? I am not depressed, I see things as Romans 1 states, don't you? The whole world lies in the Wicked One, don't you agree?

I am a Biblical realist that tell me in the last days there will be many spirits of anti-christ roaming this world. I coul;d also ask you why you are so Polyanna-ish? Perilous times are here and God wants to use His followers to reach the dark world!

dsstanfield said...

AHHHH....I am really needing to post concerning your last statement, but alas I have said I will not do so on the tattoo discussion.

Henry (rick),

Do you have a place on your blog where I could post a response, or would you rather I did not.


Melissa said...

To get back to the post itself: How far have we come from the simplicity that is in Christ? Do church fundraisers show faith in Christ? Is the fundraiser for the work that God has ordained? If so, there is lack of faith that God will provide and without faith it is impossible to please Him.

Are we so far gone that wordly methods - giving something in return for money and making a profit off the top - are acceptable in the Church? Is this against the purity that should be characterized by the brethren?

Why do we not just make the need known (i.e., a brother or family in need) and then give according to what you purpose in your heart? Why don't the men give their time and talent to help the single moms (like myself) with things they are able to do rather than those moms paying for it elsewhere? Why don't we just give to support missionaries or other brethren whom we don't know personally, but who need help and take care of the poor, the widows, and the orphans?

Why is it that we give to support a bigger and bigger machine that is called the "church"? Are we so far gone?

I am really interested in scriptural justifications for this practice. It may be done for "a" good work, but is it a godly good work? Do we even question it anymore or just go along with it? Is this what the early church did?

Dead Theologians said...


Melissa said "It may be done for "a" good work, but is it a godly good work? Do we even question it anymore or just go along with it? Is this what the early church did?"

Amen. That is why I posted this post. No one doubts that the benefit of it might be good. But is it honoring to God? Or have we turned the church into a business?


Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Anyone is welcome on my blog.

dsstanfield said...

Then Jesus went into the temple of God and drove out all those who bought and sold in the temple, and overturned the tables of the moneychangers and the seats of those who sold doves....

And He would not allow anyone to carry wares through the temple.

Then He taught, saying t them, "Is it not written, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it a 'den of thieves.'"

Many churches today are in fact run like business. I won't mention any names, fearing castigation by some, but when we market the church, what else can one expect...

We have bookstores in churches (I am not against book tables and such, just selling for profit), Starbucks Coffee in churches, Cafe's in churches.

JSU said...

Sorry guys, it looks like I'm a little late for the party.

"Many churches today are in fact run like business."

A deacon in a church was telling me that most pastors in America do not have a business degree. They go to seminary, but don't have the slightest idea how a business is run. He believed that pastors need to be learned in the business world so that they can better lead a church.

I was disgusted. Churches are treated like businesses. They want their pastor to be the business manager so that he knows how to rake in the business.

It's very sad how holiness and godliness have just been dumped for money. Who has ever heard of living by faith? Shouldn't that apply to churches as well?


Blog Widget by LinkWithin