Joel Osteen is a fraud meta thread

[RDCanecutter 26422]

11 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

This is allsome 

Me: "We didn't get to go to England."

She: "Oh well ye didn't miss much!"

[Thetexashammer 1062]

[52-80 19151]

21 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

The Word of God travels faster in a 600hp car

[Thetexashammer 1062]

Dude at work hates me because i referred to Osteen as a Jesus starter kit who teaches obvious heresies.

Once you undestand most people are going to hell it makes more sense.

[Dennis Taylor 18814]

12 hours ago, ERhine said:

You keep posting and adding nothing of substance. Do I need to fucking spoon feed it to you? Read the thread. Google his actions. Do something other than post repeatedly about how without having done anything to look into the issue you don’t understand why the thirty or so Houston posters on the thread dislike him.

I don’t know why I’m even engaging with you because you’ll post some other equally worthless post about blah blah blah and you don’t get it. Whatever.

man i didn't even know you posted words 

[Shmitty 112]

1 hour ago, Lobo said:

Somebody remind me how Osteen is no better than most organized churches in this country?  

Charisma  

[52-80 19151]

21 minutes ago, Shmitty said:

Charisma  

and that hair... its no joke

[Uncle Nate 2097]

Let's be careful not to lump all churches in with the Osteen-modeled prosperity gospel mega churches that are nothing more than big businesses who do not preach basic Christian principles, but rather are more of a motivational speaker/entertainment show combination.

I read some of the posts here and it makes me fearful that for all too many it has to be an "all or nothing" approach.  I think such an approach would ruin, and I don't use that term lightly, a large number of small, struggling congregations who are money poor but Gospel rich.  My little church falls into that category.

These prosperity gospel preachers like Osteen, the guy in the Woodlands, and guys up here in DFW are preaching a false gospel, and raking in millions in the process.  I have no problem with them being taxed because clearly they are simply wealthy motivational speakers.  I've listened to Osteen a few times on the teevee...and I don't recall the name Jesus ever being uttered by him, nor the gospel that we are saved through Christ's blood alone.

But in our zeal to call these mega-church millionaire preachers out for the con men they are (and they are con men, there is no doubt), let's be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater and destroy a number of good, true gospel-preaching small, poor congregations in the process.  If my church had to pay property taxes on our small, dilapidated property at the rates of a normal business, we would have to shut our doors.  That would also shut the doors on our Christian daycare that my community...many of whom are not Christian at all...have come to depend on for good, quality, child care that they can't find elsewhere.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Uncle Nate

[KatHorn 20]

This

[hayden_horn 11362]

this guy is still allowed to hawk this shit tax exempt.

[HouTex 1867]

Not an Osteen fan at all, but how would you tax him or his church? He would pay tax on his salary but I've heard it's small. Or how would you tax churches in general? They don't really make a profit as such. They hope to cover expenses and if they do they give the rest away (at least most do--not sure about Lakewood) You can tax their property but the valuation would be difficult. First United Methodist in downtown Houston takes up a city block. First Baptist Dallas probably has more. Second Baptist Houston has 75? acres of prime Tanglewood area real estate. St Martin's Episcopal Houston and St Michael's Catholic Houston also are sitting on extremely valuable land. But in their hands the land and buildings really have no value. Unless the laws are completely overhauled to apply a special valuation method for churches (and probably not constitutional) it would be very difficult to tax them.

[52-80 19151]

25 minutes ago, HouTex said:

Not an Osteen fan at all, but how would you tax him or his church? He would pay tax on his salary but I've heard it's small. Or how would you tax churches in general?

Tax everything and let God sort it out

[Uncle Nate 2097]

32 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

Tax everything and let God sort it out

All or nothing?

Small poor churches be damned?

[Catpfish 618]

I would offer a large exemption for churches...say $1 million and then tax over that.  The church I used to attend is not that large of a congregation (probably averages around 400 attendance through the various Sunday services), but somehow they convinced themselves that they needed a gym for a recreational venue for members.  When that got taken in to replace the fellowship hall that they had convinced themselves was too small, they built another gym.  There is zero reason for churches to be providing recreational outlets of this type.  This is the kind of stuff I would like to see taxed.  How much more could be done without having to handle to the upkeep and utilities on buildings that don't really provide for their mission?

Edited August 16, 2018 by Catpfish

[Macanudo 12976]

1 hour ago, Uncle Nate said:

Let's be careful not to lump all churches in with the Osteen-modeled prosperity gospel mega churches that are nothing more than big businesses who do not preach basic Christian principles, but rather are more of a motivational speaker/entertainment show combination.

I read some of the posts here and it makes me fearful that for all too many it has to be an "all or nothing" approach.  I think such an approach would ruin, and I don't use that term lightly, a large number of small, struggling congregations who are money poor but Gospel rich.  My little church falls into that category.

These prosperity gospel preachers like Osteen, the guy in the Woodlands, and guys up here in DFW are preaching a false gospel, and raking in millions in the process.  I have no problem with them being taxed because clearly they are simply wealthy motivational speakers.  I've listened to Osteen a few times on the teevee...and I don't recall the name Jesus ever being uttered by him, nor the gospel that we are saved through Christ's blood alone.

But in our zeal to call these mega-church millionaire preachers out for the con men they are (and they are con men, there is no doubt), let's be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater and destroy a number of good, true gospel-preaching small, poor congregations in the process.  If my church had to pay property taxes on our small, dilapidated property at the rates of a normal business, we would have to shut our doors.  That would also shut the doors on our Christian daycare that my community...many of whom are not Christian at all...have come to depend on for good, quality, child care that they can't find elsewhere.

At least these heretics are pedo-buggerist Catholic priests.  

[SHOOTER12 8805]

13 hours ago, TexArcher said:

Joel Osteen makes me wish Hell existed.

Heck he IS proof it exists, after all he is the devil.

[Thetexashammer 1062]

41 minutes ago, Catpfish said:

I would offer a large exemption for churches...say $1 million and then tax over that.  The church I used to attend is not that large of a congregation (probably averages around 400 attendance through the various Sunday services), but somehow they convinced themselves that they needed a gym for a recreational venue for members.  When that got taken in to replace the fellowship hall that they had convinced themselves was too small, they built another gym.  There is zero reason for churches to be providing recreational outlets of this type.  This is the kind of stuff I would like to see taxed.  How much more could be done without having to handle to the upkeep and utilities on buildings that don't really provide for their mission?

You're not tracking. Money comes in, momey goes out. There is no "net income" to tax.

[gsoda3 3256]

^^^ hello Matt.

[Catpfish 618]

31 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

You're not tracking. Money comes in, momey goes out. There is no "net income" to tax.

I'm tracking just fine.  I'm referring to property taxes

[52-80 19151]

How would I go about converting my self into a religious entity and getting my employer to pay my salary as a tithe.  Hypothetically speaking?

[dark54555 72]

On 8/15/2018 at 10:51 AM, Grade of D as in David said:

We really need to start taxing mega churches

THIS THIS THIS

[NeverMarryAStripper 21905]

1 hour ago, Catpfish said:

There is zero reason for churches to be providing recreational outlets of this type.  This is the kind of stuff I would like to see taxed.  How much more could be done without having to handle to the upkeep and utilities on buildings that don't really provide for their mission?

This is exactly the type of things that churches should be providing.  My church has a gym and a recreation center and provides supervised activities for middle and high school kids.  They are staffed with volunteers every day after school and provide a safe place for kids with no parent at home to go.  Kids don't have to be church members, or Christians to go.  These type of community based services that aren't provided elsewhere are what churches should be doing.

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

Sounds like a good place for child molesters to volunteer. 

[Dennis Taylor 18814]

the shook brother that has a church at 290 near 99 has not  1 but 2 ATMs in his lobby and lives in a 530K house...not quite up to his brother's standard of 860K in the woodlands but not too shabby  

[Bevo 13576]

49 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

This is exactly the type of things that churches should be providing.  My church has a gym and a recreation center and provides supervised activities for middle and high school kids.  They are staffed with volunteers every day after school and provide a safe place for kids with no parent at home to go.  Kids don't have to be church members, or Christians to go.  These type of community based services that aren't provided elsewhere are what churches should be doing.

Yeah, I probably went to Chapelwood and 2nd Baptist more than Beth Israel because basketball. Post Oak Young Men's Christian Association was where I went most often, though.

[mushroomface 62]

[Thetexashammer 1062]

2 hours ago, Catpfish said:

I'm tracking just fine.  I'm referring to property taxes

Roger. Most people dp2nt get that. 

Os the local exemption for "nonprofits"b community service groups, or churches specifically?

[JimmyJames 12271]

8 hours ago, Uncle Nate said:

Let's be careful not to lump all churches in with the Osteen-modeled prosperity gospel mega churches that are nothing more than big businesses who do not preach basic Christian principles, but rather are more of a motivational speaker/entertainment show combination.

I read some of the posts here and it makes me fearful that for all too many it has to be an "all or nothing" approach.  I think such an approach would ruin, and I don't use that term lightly, a large number of small, struggling congregations who are money poor but Gospel rich.  My little church falls into that category.

These prosperity gospel preachers like Osteen, the guy in the Woodlands, and guys up here in DFW are preaching a false gospel, and raking in millions in the process.  I have no problem with them being taxed because clearly they are simply wealthy motivational speakers.  I've listened to Osteen a few times on the teevee...and I don't recall the name Jesus ever being uttered by him, nor the gospel that we are saved through Christ's blood alone.

But in our zeal to call these mega-church millionaire preachers out for the con men they are (and they are con men, there is no doubt), let's be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater and destroy a number of good, true gospel-preaching small, poor congregations in the process.  If my church had to pay property taxes on our small, dilapidated property at the rates of a normal business, we would have to shut our doors.  That would also shut the doors on our Christian daycare that my community...many of whom are not Christian at all...have come to depend on for good, quality, child care that they can't find elsewhere.

Good post. Set a revenue limit and after a certain threshold it gets taxed. Problem solved. No more Olsteen mansions and half a million dollar sports cars, all thanks to tax free income. And if they still can afford it after tax, more power to them.  

[BurntOrange&White 39931]

Also remember during the flood he green screened himself at his church with the supplies in the back ground to try and make it look like he was there helping? I member

[miguelito 11263]

Seriously?  Rather than go stand by the supplies for 10 seconds for a photo op, he went through the process of a green screen and photoshop/MS Paint?  Wow.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4976]

Well the supplies weren't in the safety of his home.

[Guest]

21 hours ago, Catpfish said:

I would offer a large exemption for churches...say $1 million and then tax over that.  The church I used to attend is not that large of a congregation (probably averages around 400 attendance through the various Sunday services), but somehow they convinced themselves that they needed a gym for a recreational venue for members.  When that got taken in to replace the fellowship hall that they had convinced themselves was too small, they built another gym.  There is zero reason for churches to be providing recreational outlets of this type.  This is the kind of stuff I would like to see taxed.  How much more could be done without having to handle to the upkeep and utilities on buildings that don't really provide for their mission?

Wrong.

The gyms can serve as community assets both in ministry/ fellowship of citzens on a near daily basis. Membership in the church is not required to attend.  They also are for shelters in times of distress/ natural disasters.

 

FTR not a fan of fako Joel either.

Edited August 17, 2018 by slorch

[TwiceHorn 31456]

Yeah, I don't have a problem with gyms as a general proposition.  Might not be the wisest expenditure for a small congregation, but they serve a useful community purpose.  Sports and physical activities, I think most would agree, can be a great venue for learning character and value lessons.

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610]

I'm proud to report that he, his wife and their horrible church have all banned me from their Twitter.

I would so love to watch him feel down the hole of despair ala cricket from it's always sunny...

[Born to Run 6569]

All I know is Chronicle's reporting said they spent $90 million in 2016-2017:
Weekly services accounted for 35% of their spending
TV ministry accounted for 28%
Mission and outreach accounted for.... 1.3%.  They spent almost 12x that on fundraising.
They made $78 million in contributions.  $2.8 million in product sales. $1.75 million in touring events.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4489169-2017-Financial-Statements-for-Lakewood-Church.html

1.3% of revenue in outreach and mission work.

That’s fucked. Maybe have a total charity/ outreach fund meet a decent percentage of total budget or face the tax hammer.

My church releases financials each week. And mission work is way higher than 1.3%.

Who gives these fuckers money.

[52-80 19151]

53 minutes ago, Born to Run said:

 

Who gives these fuckers money.

 

Kayden, Jayden, and braylen's mom

[Amos Moses 795]

Who gives them money?  People who want to feel good about themselves because Joel told them a passage in the Bible informs (sort of) they should.

[hobbes2702 13032]

On 8/16/2018 at 10:52 AM, Uncle Nate said:

All or nothing?

Small poor churches be damned?

Yes. Stop using the government to fund fairy tales.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

20 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Yes. Stop using the government to fund fairy tales.

The government is not "funding" them.

Not taxing does not equate to funding.

 

[hobbes2702 13032]

18 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

The government is not "funding" them.

Not taxing does not equate to funding.

 

Cool. Then stop giving them an exemption from the thing that everyone else has to do. 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

18 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Cool. Then stop giving them an exemption from the thing that everyone else has to do. 

If you tax the churches like everyone else, then the churches get to have a say in the government (the churches, not the individual members).  I don't think you want that, do you?  I don't.  I believe in the separation of church and state.  It's called the two kingdoms.

I don't want the church involved in the government, and I don't want the government involved in the church.  The only way to have true separation.

[hobbes2702 13032]

19 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

If you tax the churches like everyone else, then the churches get to have a say in the government (the churches, not the individual members).  I don't think you want that, do you?  I don't.  I believe in the separation of church and state.  It's called the two kingdoms.

I don't want the church involved in the government, and I don't want the government involved in the church.  The only way to have true separation.

The churchs have a say in the government now. Osteen’s church made 78 million in contributions.

Treat the Church like every other for profit entity in the county. They are a business and nothing more. Treat them as such.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

19 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

The churchs have a say in the government now. Osteen’s church made 78 million in contributions.

Treat the Church like every other for profit entity in the county. They are a business and nothing more. Treat them as such.

But they aren't for profit.

And I'm not talking about the mega churches.  I'm talking about the small, barely surviving churches. They don't even know what a profit would look like.  They expend more into the community than they bring in.  

 

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610]

21 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

If you tax the churches like everyone else, then the churches get to have a say in the government (the churches, not the individual members).  I don't think you want that, do you?  I don't.  I believe in the separation of church and state.  It's called the two kingdoms.

I don't want the church involved in the government, and I don't want the government involved in the church.  The only way to have true separation.

Marvel Comics pays its taxes and it churns out more relevant and compelling literature on a regular basis than does the entirety of any church or religion in the country. But not only that, they don't see their way into trying to get involved in the politics of the government. So yeah, your fucking church can pay taxes dickbag.

[hobbes2702 13032]

19 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

But they aren't for profit.

And I'm not talking about the mega churches.  I'm talking about the small, barely surviving churches. They don't even know what a profit would look like.  They expend more into the community than they bring in.  

 

Then get more followers. Basic business. They can’t make enough to pay taxes, they shouldn’t exist.

[Uncle Nate 2097]

19 minutes ago, HOOK'EMHOOAH said:

Marvel Comics pays its taxes and it churns out more relevant and compelling literature on a regular basis than does the entirety of any church or religion in the country. But not only that, they don't see their way into trying to get involved in the politics of the government. So yeah, your fucking church can pay taxes dickbag.

What's with the hate?  This debate has been civil.

 

[Uncle Nate 2097]

23 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Then get more followers. Basic business. They can’t make enough to pay taxes, they shouldn’t exist.

Do you have the same stance for every other non-profit, or just the religious ones?

 

Edited August 17, 2018 by Uncle Nate

[hobbes2702 13032]

21 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Do you have the same stance for every other non-profit, of just the religious ones?

 

Haven’t done enough research into others. That has nothing to do with the fact that every church should pay taxes

[Uncle Nate 2097]

18 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Haven’t done enough research into others. That has nothing to do with the fact that every church should pay taxes

Actually, it very much does.  If you single out churches as non-profits that should pay taxes but not other non-profits, then you are discriminating solely on the basis of religion, which is unconstitutional.

 

[hobbes2702 13032]

20 minutes ago, Uncle Nate said:

Actually, it very much does.  If you single out churches as non-profits that should pay taxes but not other non-profits, then you are discriminating solely on the basis of religion, which is unconstitutional.

 

You’re not singling them out. You’re doing to opposite in fact.