Deleted
Posts: 0
May 17, 2024 22:45:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 4:58:54 GMT
No different than all the other mega-churches out there . . . Osteen, etc. They're all gross. The Catholic church is right up there with the mega churches on this kind of thing, too. Right. And the Mormon church owns a mall. They are all ridiculous in my opinion. This, among other reasons, is why I think churches should not be tax exempt. They take complete advantage of the communities in which they reside. It is a great and spacious building.
|
|
stittsygirl
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,580
Location: In the leaves and rain.
Jun 25, 2014 19:57:33 GMT
|
Post by stittsygirl on May 19, 2015 9:12:39 GMT
Right. And the Mormon church owns a mall. They are all ridiculous in my opinion. This, among other reasons, is why I think churches should not be tax exempt. They take complete advantage of the communities in which they reside. It is a great and spacious building. Three billion dollars worth. With a Tiffany's. After that show of hubris, and most of their members trying to defend it, nothing churches do surprises me anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 17, 2024 22:45:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 9:43:15 GMT
According to the fine print this is a Methodist church. I'm really surprised because the Methodist churches I know are all ordinary sized, or very small. I associate Methodism with the 3-point-charge, and a dedication to keeping even small churches open.
Link to church homepageI don't think this is the " run of the mill" Methodist church though. It's actually called the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection. Totally different to the usual Methodist denomination. It's an evangelical church: The founder of the Methodist movement that most people associate with with John Wesley. How obscene that they would spend that amount of money on a a building to use as a place of worship, when they could have done far more good in their ministry of the poor and starving of this world.
|
|
|
Post by monklady123 on May 19, 2015 10:25:05 GMT
According to the fine print this is a Methodist church. I'm really surprised because the Methodist churches I know are all ordinary sized, or very small. I associate Methodism with the 3-point-charge, and a dedication to keeping even small churches open.
Link to church homepageI don't think this is the " run of the mill" Methodist church though. It's actually called the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection. Totally different to the usual Methodist denomination. It's an evangelical church: The founder of the Methodist movement that most people associate with with John Wesley. How obscene that they would spend that amount of money on a a building to use as a place of worship, when they could have done far more good in their ministry of the poor and starving of this world. No, it's very definitely a United Methodist church. That symbol near their name is the Methodist cross and flame, and in the FAQs somewhere they talk about their beliefs as United Methodists. It did say that the church has grown from some tiny number to what it is today so I think maybe Adam Hamilton was the first pastor of this church as possibly a new church plant. I think that's what "founding pastor" means -- just for this particular church, not Methodism as a denomination. As you said, John Wesley is the Father of Methodism. On their home page they have a link to information about "a special message from Bishop Sundo Kim", although the link doesn't take me to anything that I can see about Bishop Kim. Bishop Kim is (or was? not sure about that) the pastor of a HUGE Methodist church in Korea. My seminary (which is Methodist, although I'm Presbyterian) has a chair named for him -- The Bishop Sundo Kim Chair in World Christianity. Bishop Kim's story is riveting, beginning from his early life in North Korea and then his escape to the South. I would bet that Bishop Kim approves of this huge building because his own back in Korea is just as big.
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on May 19, 2015 11:21:01 GMT
I am not a church goer so much, but I am a faithful kind of girl. I am also a big believer of people finding their own way to worship and celebrate their faith-from tiny micro-congregations to huge mega churches. It may not be MY way, but if it works for someone, I'm down with it.
One thing I noticed was that one of the big missions for the church is outreach-I got the feeling that part of the reason they were going so big was to have the space to hold all the young people they hope to reach. I think I respect that idea.
It's not my gig, but if people find comfort in the message, and are willing to foot the bill for it, then I am going to let them dance their own dance on this one.
|
|
mallie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,253
Jul 3, 2014 18:13:13 GMT
|
Post by mallie on May 19, 2015 11:37:44 GMT
The senior pastor is Adam Hamilton, who is a "celebrity pastor". He makes a lot of money off of his very popular dvd series. The United Methodist Church historically has been focused on helping others and it's founder John Wesley is no doubt rolling in his grave over this monument to pridefulness and ego. I also wonder what the bishop thinks of this capital campaign since the big focus of the national council of bishops has been to raise money for their anti malaria program for Africa.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 17, 2024 22:45:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 12:17:05 GMT
I don't think this is the " run of the mill" Methodist church though. It's actually called the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection. Totally different to the usual Methodist denomination. It's an evangelical church: The founder of the Methodist movement that most people associate with with John Wesley. How obscene that they would spend that amount of money on a a building to use as a place of worship, when they could have done far more good in their ministry of the poor and starving of this world. No, it's very definitely a United Methodist church. That symbol near their name is the Methodist cross and flame, and in the FAQs somewhere they talk about their beliefs as United Methodists. It did say that the church has grown from some tiny number to what it is today so I think maybe Adam Hamilton was the first pastor of this church as possibly a new church plant. I think that's what "founding pastor" means -- just for this particular church, not Methodism as a denomination. As you said, John Wesley is the Father of Methodism. On their home page they have a link to information about "a special message from Bishop Sundo Kim", although the link doesn't take me to anything that I can see about Bishop Kim. Bishop Kim is (or was? not sure about that) the pastor of a HUGE Methodist church in Korea. My seminary (which is Methodist, although I'm Presbyterian) has a chair named for him -- The Bishop Sundo Kim Chair in World Christianity. Bishop Kim's story is riveting, beginning from his early life in North Korea and then his escape to the South. I would bet that Bishop Kim approves of this huge building because his own back in Korea is just as big. Ah right,thank you for the explanation. The Methodist Church here in the UK differs ( including the logo! ) from the United Methodist Church of the US. It's still very much the Weslayan arm of Methodism.
|
|
|
Post by farmdpea on May 19, 2015 12:20:32 GMT
It's not my gig, but if people find comfort in the message, and are willing to foot the bill for it, then I am going to let them dance their own dance on this one. I think I'm with you on this one. I attend a church that doesnt have "Sunday school" simply because we want to minimize the size of the building needed. (It's a multi-site church, but all of the campuses practice this.) So, while it goes against my personal philosophy and the philosophy of MY church, I can't get that upset about it.
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on May 19, 2015 12:24:02 GMT
What church is this? There's no actual info on where, what denomination, etc. Is a weird site... It is a United Methodist Church called Church of the Resurrection in Leawood KS
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on May 19, 2015 12:26:09 GMT
Personally, I think the building is unattractive and I wouldn't want to attend a church that big, but to each his own. The price tag is mind blowing... but the building itself is really ugly!
|
|
|
Post by ktdoesntscrap on May 19, 2015 12:30:34 GMT
I am not a church goer so much, but I am a faithful kind of girl. I am also a big believer of people finding their own way to worship and celebrate their faith-from tiny micro-congregations to huge mega churches. It may not be MY way, but if it works for someone, I'm down with it. One thing I noticed was that one of the big missions for the church is outreach-I got the feeling that part of the reason they were going so big was to have the space to hold all the young people they hope to reach. I think I respect that idea. It's not my gig, but if people find comfort in the message, and are willing to foot the bill for it, then I am going to let them dance their own dance on this one. I grew up in the area... and everyone I know who is familiar with the church says that they do a lot of outreach in the area, and do a lot of good. You can build a big place, with out a $93 million dollar price tag.
|
|
|
Post by MorellisCupcake on May 19, 2015 13:18:36 GMT
Wow.
I do other, more tangible hands-on things to honor the memory of my loved ones. (Like my grandmother, age 92, who passed last week..she was always looking for a bedspread. Not a comforter, quilt, throw, blanket.. a bedspread. So the family is making it our challenge to each of us buy a bedspread on her birthday and donate it. It's going to be a fun way to remember her and she would love it.) $1000 would go a long way there.
This is one of the list of reasons why I ran from organized religion.
|
|
|
Post by 2peafaithful on May 19, 2015 13:25:39 GMT
It boggles my mind. I am just ready for Christ return.
|
|
scrappinmama
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,883
Jun 26, 2014 12:54:09 GMT
|
Post by scrappinmama on May 19, 2015 13:26:45 GMT
I'm from this area. Not everyone is a fan of the building. But I will say that they church does so much for various charities. They raised 1 million during their Christmas Eve services for the past 2 years. So that is 2 million dollars just for Christmas eve. Half of that money went to fund an inner city charity to help Kansas City schools. They provide food for low income students through a backpack program. The other half went to a charity in Africa, but I don't remember the specifics. And that was just for Christmas Eve services. They have charities that they run throughout the year.
But there is no question that the cost of building the new sanctuary is excessive.
|
|
BarbaraUK
Drama Llama
Surrounded by my yarn stash on the NE coast of England...............!! Refupea 1702
Posts: 5,961
Location: England UK
Jun 27, 2014 12:47:11 GMT
|
Post by BarbaraUK on May 19, 2015 13:36:25 GMT
I don't think this is the " run of the mill" Methodist church though. It's actually called the United Methodist Church of the Resurrection. Totally different to the usual Methodist denomination. It's an evangelical church: The founder of the Methodist movement that most people associate with with John Wesley. How obscene that they would spend that amount of money on a a building to use as a place of worship, when they could have done far more good in their ministry of the poor and starving of this world. No, it's very definitely a United Methodist church. That symbol near their name is the Methodist cross and flame, and in the FAQs somewhere they talk about their beliefs as United Methodists. It did say that the church has grown from some tiny number to what it is today so I think maybe Adam Hamilton was the first pastor of this church as possibly a new church plant. I think that's what "founding pastor" means -- just for this particular church, not Methodism as a denomination. As you said, John Wesley is the Father of Methodism. On their home page they have a link to information about "a special message from Bishop Sundo Kim", although the link doesn't take me to anything that I can see about Bishop Kim. Bishop Kim is (or was? not sure about that) the pastor of a HUGE Methodist church in Korea. My seminary (which is Methodist, although I'm Presbyterian) has a chair named for him -- The Bishop Sundo Kim Chair in World Christianity. Bishop Kim's story is riveting, beginning from his early life in North Korea and then his escape to the South. I would bet that Bishop Kim approves of this huge building because his own back in Korea is just as big. John Wesley would definitely be greatly flabbergasted for sure if he could see that! Although, to be fair, people probably said exactly the same things regarding the cost when the big Cathedrals in the UK and Europe were built!!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 17, 2024 22:45:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 13:54:59 GMT
So...how many of you are huge fans of government spending? How many of you argued FOR the Trillion dollar Obama Stimulus package, because it would "Create jobs"? That money was NOT given freely. That money was taken from the hands of businesses and individuals (mostly yet to be born, but we'll ignore that fact for now). The Stimulus did NOT create jobs. It did not create anything but more debt for our entire nation.
The money for this "church" was given freely, raised by the congregation, and it absolutely will create jobs, albeit temporary ones in construction and among the suppliers. Those people will pay taxes on those earnings, right? So why do you hate the people who will be employed in the construction of this church? The money for this church is not taken out of the pocket of a business who would have invested it more wisely, as the government does. Any jobs "created" by government spending are offset by the jobs that were not created because the business had to choose between paying their taxes/fees/regulations and creating another job.
So be consistent. If you are all for unbridled government spending because it "creates jobs", then you should be cheering the construction of this church, because it actually does create jobs without destroying others.
|
|
|
Post by Zee on May 19, 2015 14:05:31 GMT
I don't care at all. A fool and his money...
|
|
|
Post by scrapqueen01 on May 19, 2015 14:12:10 GMT
About 10 years or so ago there were quite a number of churches that started building gyms. Big gyms. Some of these churches were already very large and old. Some of these churches now are losing members and the space isn't being utilized. Giving to these building projects should be about the heart and not dictated by the desires of the pastor.
|
|
freebird
Drama Llama
'cause I'm free as a bird now
Posts: 6,927
Jun 25, 2014 20:06:48 GMT
|
Post by freebird on May 19, 2015 14:18:36 GMT
I actually have no problem with it. As long as there was no one was being dishonest with the way the money was raised to build it then no one was duped into building a church. I think it's actually beautiful. Imagine the people that will be drawn to it. I'm sure they see it as a way to bring more people to God.
|
|
perumbula
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,439
Location: Idaho
Jun 26, 2014 18:51:17 GMT
|
Post by perumbula on May 19, 2015 14:53:13 GMT
That is one ugly building. What is it with modern mega churches and their really horrible taste in architecture? I've noticed it over and over again. The bigger the new church, the uglier it is. At least Notre Dame is beautiful. That is just a wart with a stained glass window on it.
|
|
|
Post by jmurray on May 19, 2015 15:37:26 GMT
So...how many of you are huge fans of government spending? How many of you argued FOR the Trillion dollar Obama Stimulus package, because it would "Create jobs"? That money was NOT given freely. That money was taken from the hands of businesses and individuals (mostly yet to be born, but we'll ignore that fact for now). The Stimulus did NOT create jobs. It did not create anything but more debt for our entire nation. The money for this "church" was given freely, raised by the congregation, and it absolutely will create jobs, albeit temporary ones in construction and among the suppliers. Those people will pay taxes on those earnings, right? So why do you hate the people who will be employed in the construction of this church? The money for this church is not taken out of the pocket of a business who would have invested it more wisely, as the government does. Any jobs "created" by government spending are offset by the jobs that were not created because the business had to choose between paying their taxes/fees/regulations and creating another job. So be consistent. If you are all for unbridled government spending because it "creates jobs", then you should be cheering the construction of this church, because it actually does create jobs without destroying others. I must have missed a post somewhere... who said they hated the people who will be building this monstrosity? And why do I have to choose either both or neither of your comparisons? What rule book did that notion spring from? Or is it just because you say so? I'm not inconsistent at all. I detest excessive spending by any religion on superficial (and in this case ugly) monuments to their ideologies, while at the same time preaching about a man who supposedly threw out the moneylenders, lived among the poor and said it was easier for them to get into heaven than a rich dude. So there's that. Your position to equate that obscene display of wasted money to any government that tries to kick life back into their economy is nebulous at best. In fact instead of taking money from the hallowed businesses you're concernced about, this church is doing what I personally believe to be worse. It's taking money from individuals, regardless of your definition of 'taken'. If it was offered they took it, so it's taken - not stolen. Following your logic, these individuals could instead have used that money for a far better purpose. Good grief - almost anything they spent it on would be a better purpose. One that comes to mind is directly contributing to the charities this church claims to be helping. It would certainly raise more than the million or 2 they've handed out, which is quite paltry in comparison to the cost of this thing.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 17, 2024 22:45:18 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 15:49:06 GMT
In view of the unimaginable number of unnecessary expenditures that people and institutions all over the world spend billions on, I find our outrage a little overboard.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on May 19, 2015 15:53:42 GMT
Completely and utterly indefensible. " Give to the stained glass window"... No thanks, I'll continue giving to Kobina, my Compassion International child. ETA: In view of the unimaginable number of unnecessary expenditures that people and institutions all over the world spend billions on, I find our outrage a little overboard. The difference here, I think, is that a church (particularly one claiming Christianity) should be following the directive of Jesus which is to help those less fortunate, feed the poor, take care of the sick, minster to those in prison, etc. This building though. Yes, it benefits local businesses, but who is it really benefiting? Those building it. When that money could be going to so many other, more godly endeavors. It feels like an insult to what Jesus actually stands for.
|
|
|
Post by jmurray on May 19, 2015 16:03:10 GMT
In view of the unimaginable number of unnecessary expenditures that people and institutions all over the world spend billions on, I find our outrage a little overboard. My "outrage", if that's what you want to call it, isn't solely due to the expense. It's also due to the hypocrisy that's going along with it. There are thousands of buildings being developed all over the world that cost way more, but for a church to do it is, to me, obscene when there are so many more productive ways they could use that money to benefit others. Isn't that one of the things a church is meant to stand for after all? ?
|
|
|
Post by greenlegume on May 19, 2015 16:23:09 GMT
So...how many of you are huge fans of government spending? How many of you argued FOR the Trillion dollar Obama Stimulus package, because it would "Create jobs"? That money was NOT given freely. That money was taken from the hands of businesses and individuals (mostly yet to be born, but we'll ignore that fact for now). The Stimulus did NOT create jobs. It did not create anything but more debt for our entire nation. The money for this "church" was given freely, raised by the congregation, and it absolutely will create jobs, albeit temporary ones in construction and among the suppliers. Those people will pay taxes on those earnings, right? So why do you hate the people who will be employed in the construction of this church? The money for this church is not taken out of the pocket of a business who would have invested it more wisely, as the government does. Any jobs "created" by government spending are offset by the jobs that were not created because the business had to choose between paying their taxes/fees/regulations and creating another job. So be consistent. If you are all for unbridled government spending because it "creates jobs", then you should be cheering the construction of this church, because it actually does create jobs without destroying others. ^total batshittery^
|
|
|
Post by moveablefeast on May 19, 2015 16:37:26 GMT
So...how many of you are huge fans of government spending? How many of you argued FOR the Trillion dollar Obama Stimulus package, because it would "Create jobs"? That money was NOT given freely. That money was taken from the hands of businesses and individuals (mostly yet to be born, but we'll ignore that fact for now). The Stimulus did NOT create jobs. It did not create anything but more debt for our entire nation. The money for this "church" was given freely, raised by the congregation, and it absolutely will create jobs, albeit temporary ones in construction and among the suppliers. Those people will pay taxes on those earnings, right? So why do you hate the people who will be employed in the construction of this church? The money for this church is not taken out of the pocket of a business who would have invested it more wisely, as the government does. Any jobs "created" by government spending are offset by the jobs that were not created because the business had to choose between paying their taxes/fees/regulations and creating another job. So be consistent. If you are all for unbridled government spending because it "creates jobs", then you should be cheering the construction of this church, because it actually does create jobs without destroying others. ^total batshittery^ In all honesty, I want so badly not to judge fellow believers that I am willing to attempt the mental gymnastics - buts to the end of the day it doesn't work for me. I find the argument by the church that this is not money taken from missions because it was never in the missions budget to begin with at least marginally spurious. That is still money that could have been used for missions. Our church anticipates a building campaign at some point, and expect it to go into the million range due to the size of the building (to include a school) and the location. Not $90m, but maybe $3m when all is said and done. We are about half te size of the church in question. For me personally, I think a beautiful building is a wonderful thing. It can create in people a sense of devotion to The Lord and be an icon of heaven. But a building can be both beautiful and modest and I would not personally be able to support a project like this $90m building, financially or with my participation in the church. This is just too much for me. I think most churches need facilities to meet certain goals. We could all meet in elementary schools and spend no money on buildings and give every penny to the hungry and that would be really good. But we do also want to do things like educate our kids and we need a building to do that. And that is appropriate as it is part of the Great Commission. So these beautiful spaces for community and fellowship and discipleship I understand, and want them for us, too, in our new home. But we don't need to do that extravagantly. that's my opinion anyway.
|
|
|
Post by originalvanillabean on May 19, 2015 17:12:18 GMT
Wow, so large. Wow!
|
|
|
Post by greenlegume on May 19, 2015 17:24:38 GMT
The hypocrisy is the worst part of it all. Obese, multiple-times divorced, etc. people sitting in a megachurch like the one pictured above, trying to explain away their extravagance on multi-million dollar facilities,complete with NFL-rivaling gyms, Starbucks, video game centers, etc. that they claim are going to "bring people to god," all while condemning non-Christians, homosexuals,"liberals," etc.
Like jmurray said, the church linked in the OP has handed out a paltry million or two compared to the hundreds of millions they're spending on this building. Is it really to bring people to god? It feels like it's more about their own comfort and luxuries than in bringing people to god. Because, really, if you're going to call yourself a Christian, maybe the first and biggest rule you ought to have is to emulate Christ. The Christ in all the bibles I've read wouldn't be hanging out in one of these so-called churches.
|
|
MizIndependent
Drama Llama
Quit your bullpoop.
Posts: 5,836
Jun 25, 2014 19:43:16 GMT
|
Post by MizIndependent on May 19, 2015 17:27:33 GMT
lol...your comment reminded me of this:
|
|
|
Post by annabella on May 19, 2015 17:47:10 GMT
An important aspect of church to me is fellowship, I like knowing a lot of people and seeing familiar faces. You can barely scratch the surface with a megachurch. Seems like it's more the dream of the Pastor to have so many sheep in his flock.
|
|