Dear Editor,
I refer to the ST article by Andy Ho titled “Megachurches’ tax status bears scrutiny” dated 1 April 2010.
I believe the joint reply by IRAS, MCYS and URA in response to the forum letter by Mr Lester Lam on the same subject has clarified the official position of the respective authorities. Nonetheless, I think Andy’s effort to share further insights on the matter is commendable.
I find it unfortunate though, that Andy failed to make a distinction between churches that do not solicit funds from the general public with charities that do. By using terms such as ‘public charities’, ‘public policy’ and ‘public money’ in his discussion about churches, he might have caused some confusion among his readers who may be led to think that churches are involved in soliciting funds from the general public like charities such as Ren Ci Hospital and NKF, when in fact churches only receive tithes and offerings from their members. In this respect, churches are similar to private foundations whose funds come from select groups of individuals and families and not the general public.
As to whether the funds of a church and its related entities should be subject to taxation, I think a distinction should be made between income generated from business activities and the tithes and offerings received from church members. In view of the difference in their nature – one being commercial and the other being non-commercial, I believe the former should be subject to taxation but not the latter. In order to properly record and report the different forms of activities conducted by the church and its related entities, it is therefore crucial for churches to make sure their organisational structure and their accounting functions are suitably set up and adequately segregated. Having said the above, I reckon this is a matter best left to the relevant authorities to deliberate and decide upon.
With regards the motivation of the mega churches getting involved in commercial deals, I am of the view that they are not motivated by profits, but by the practical needs for larger venues to accommodate their growing congregations. In Singapore, land plots allotted for religious use are limited in availability and size – a typical plot is usually around 4,000 sq m in size, which is good for a 1,000 plus seat sanctuary. With such strict zoning of land usage in Singapore, mega churches are, in a sense, ‘forced’ to take the commercial path. How many of us would seriously regard committing funds into the building of a civic and cultural centre or the securing of some convention facilities as the best way to invest for profits? If the key objective were to be profits, I believe most of us would prefer to go for the many other options available.
It is also important for some of us to clear the misconception that the mega churches are constructing a church building, or converting existing commercial properties into premises exclusively for church use. The civic and cultural centre at one-north will be, and the Suntec Convention Centre will remain, open to and available for the public to use and enjoy. The mega churches in question will only be renting certain spaces at the respective venues when needed, not unlike what the smaller churches are doing on weekends all around Singapore – leasing the many hotel ballrooms and other commercial venues to hold their activities.
As for the issue on members’ voting rights, I believe that in large organisations, for practical and efficiency reasons, it is not uncommon to have a smaller group of voting members making decisions on behalf of the larger whole of all members. In Singapore, a church may set its own policies on membership criteria, privileges and voting rights and these are subject to approval by the Registrar of Societies. Setting the appropriate criteria for full voting membership is an important step to protect the vision and the finances of a church, or for the matter, any society or association.
Valid concerns and suggestions have been raised by various quarters in our community since City Harvest Church made their announcement on the Suntec deal. Let us trust the Commissioner of Charity and his team, whom I understand are looking into the matter, to carry out the necessary investigations and clarifications, and to enforce the appropriate measures to safeguard the best interests of everyone concerned.
Best regards,
Tan Lip Kee
------------------------------------------------------
The Straits Times – Review
Apr 1, 2010
Megachurches’ tax status bears scrutiny
By Andy Ho
A LOCAL megachurch announced recently that, for $310 million, it was becoming a co-owner of Suntec Singapore.
According to Reverend Kong Hee, who heads City Harvest Church, the megachurch will co-own a company that already owns, in aggregate, 80 per cent of Suntec. That company’s profits are, of course, taxed. Thus when the church receives its share of that after-tax income, it would be all kosher.
The church says it created a free-standing, for-profit corporate entity, which it wholly owns, to house its business operations. Still, in a partnership and other joint-venture arrangements, each partner is regarded as being fully involved in the underlying business. The church leadership is reported to have explained that co-ownership of Suntec means that ‘the rent we pay out (in renting space at Suntec) will be recovered by CHC (City Harvest Church) in the form of profits and dividends’.
Could this deal jeopardise the church’s tax-exempt status? The Commissioner of Charities is seeking clarifications from City Harvest on its business venture.
On his website, Reverend Kong lists his occupation as ‘businessman’ and says he has a doctorate in business from Seoul’s Hansei University – called Soonshin University before 1997 and Full Gospel Theological College in the 1950s. Reverend Kong also has a master’s degree and a doctorate in theology, both from an online school. One thus assumes that Reverend Kong, presumably having also been duly advised, would have been able to digest and grasp the tax issues involved.
Why the unease with a church going into business? At first blush, it seems unnecessary to prevent charities, churches included, from using the market as a source of funding. After all, no one would want to ban gift shops or restaurants at the Art Museum or the zoo, for instance.
In a 4-1 majority decision in the Commissioner of Taxation v Word Investments, the Australian High Court declared that ‘commercial activities and charitable status are not necessarily inconsistent’.
Still, many find commercial activity by charities odd or even unacceptable. If nothing else, their resources as well as the attention of their managers could be diverted from their core missions. Such charities may also come to be run by a set of managers motivated by market values, the opposite of the altruism that charities should exemplify.
Moreover, commercial activity can also morph into empire building for its own sake, with profits being ploughed back into the business instead of funding the charity’s non-business activities.
But these are issues that concern only the organisations themselves. The public policy issue here is whether charities that engage in substantial commercial activity should still retain their tax-exempt status and how they ought to be regulated.
The reason the public should be concerned is that tax exemption is, in effect, a government subsidy. When a church goes into business, the public dollar is effectively subsidising that activity. For example, because City Harvest is using tax-exempt money to buy its share of Suntec, the transaction is effectively being subsidised by public money.
Legal and taxation experts suggest that a corrective tax mechanism would be justifiable in such circumstances. After all, it is implicitly assumed that religious organisations cannot afford to pay taxes since their assets do not produce income streams.
But when a church engages in a massive commercial transaction, it shows that it clearly could have afforded those taxes. Thus, the government would be justified in recouping any uncollected tax.
Think of it as an exit tax imposed on the church for exiting its exclusively non-profit stance for a for-profit one, at least in part.
How should such churches be regulated henceforth?
At least two megachurches here seem to govern themselves more like private foundations than public charities. While a believer at a typical autonomous, non-denominational church here can opt to become a full voting member of his church, very few – say, 700 out of 30,000 in a megachurch that is an autonomous, non-denominational set-up – may be invited to become voting ‘executive members’.
Irked by the Suntec deal, investment banker Simon Teoh, who attends City Harvest, has written to the Commissioner of Charities. He alleges that the church’s 12-member management board went ahead ‘with utilising the church’s building fund ($65 million as of end-October 2009) and committing the church to large future liabilities…without consulting the members…at the recent AGM. No EGM has been scheduled’.
Thus, in effect, these megachurches govern themselves like private foundations. In Singapore, private foundations are lightly regulated compared to public charities since their funds come from wealthy individuals or families and not the public. But most private foundations are grant-making institutions. These churches, by contrast, not only make no grants but instead solicit funds from the public.
Once their business enterprises can regularly channel enough profits to them so that Sunday collections will no longer matter, the management boards of these megachurches will no longer be dependent on their members.
But citizens – or the relevant group of citizens, at least – should have a voice in the governance of such churches as long as they are still soliciting funds from the public.
So the Commissioner of Charities should consider if such churches should be regulated more closely. Certainly, their tax-exempt status is no sacred cow that cannot be slaughtered if a critical re-examination justifies doing so.
andyho@sph.com.sg
Copyright © 2007 Singapore Press Holdings. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement & Condition of Access
Showing posts with label new creation church. Show all posts
Showing posts with label new creation church. Show all posts
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Suntec Convention Centre: CHC’s New Home
"CHC’s New Home: Suntec Convention Centre" was the title of a news article that appeared on the front page of The Sunday Times, on March 7th, 2010. An extract of the article is reproduced below:
"Amid cheers from the congregation, City Harvest Church (CHC) yesterday announced that it will pay $310 million to become a co-owner of Suntec Singapore, a prime piece of downtown real estate.
Senior pastor Kong Hee broke the news first at CHC's service at its Jurong West building, then later at another service at the Singapore Expo in Changi.
He said CHC had acquired a 'substantial stake in a consortium company that owns 80 per cent of a joint venture fund that owns Suntec Singapore'.
The complex's full name is Suntec Singapore International Convention and Exhibition Centre.
The $310 million includes the cost of acquiring shares in the consortium, rental costs, renovation costs and others.
Suntec Singapore was acquired by ARA Asset Management through the ARA Harmony Fund last year, with its investors comprising Suntec Reit - which holds 20 per cent - and a consortium company which holds 80 per cent."
(Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_499058.html)
On March 8th, 2010, Kong Hee, the senior pastor of CHC posted a blog entry which elaborated more on the matter. By 12 March, 2010, the blog entry attracted more than 160 comments.
One of the most interesting comments was made on March 12th, 2010 at 12.20am, by John, apparently an executive member of CHC, in response to a comment made on March 11th, 2010 at 10.16pm by Derek Dunn, the executive pastor of CHC. John's comment is reproduced below:
"Dear Pastor Derek,
I shall accord you the respect you deserve as an Executive Pastor and return the politeness in my reply to you. I guess it’s not in my place to accept the apology concerning remarks made about the other church which was named openly by Pastor Kong Hee, but I do appreciate the gesture. As to whether it was done intentionally or not, I have to say that you know it’s not the first time. I do hope that we learn to treat our fellow brothers with respect since we are all in the same family. We may differ in our interpretation of scripture, but to categorize them with sinners is very uncalled for.
With regards to the truth behind the Suntec deal, I guess it may be a true fact about the non-disclosure but at the same time it is also a convenient excuse to not divulge very key information that is crucial for the confidence and full-hearted support of this deal by every member. I still do not understand why the leaders agree to a non-disclosure for the sake of Harmony’s shareholders when the members of the church, who are essentially shareholders too, are kept in the dark.
I agree that minority could mean anything from 1 share to 1 short of 50%, but you, of all people, should know that the stake purchased, based on our available funds and based on sound reasoning, is going to be found in the far lower half of that range. Yes, maybe in time to come when the full $310M is raised, but not now and certainly not in the near future.
This is one other reason why people like me are unhappy. To see our leaders say things that is technically not a lie but yet leads to a certain impression. And it results in our members, especially the young ones, going around declaring, blogging, twitting and facebooking we own Suntec City, have 1,000,000 sq ft, we have 78 years lease, the other church will pay rent to us and all for $310M, compared to other church who pay $500M for 30 years (evidenced in contributions above).
Please… even if we have a better deal, should we have such an attitude? This kind of behavior is a reflection of a leadership that is always comparing, competing and always needing to be number one. I know somebody’s got to be number one but it’s the competitiveness and the strong driving ethos of the church that makes many of our members to behave this way.
Why don’t the leadership do something and correct the wrong impressions concerning the building? I’m sure something can be done without infringing on the NDA.
Pastor Derek, with regards to the building, you don’t have to answer since it’ll be difficult to clarify without disclosing confidential info. I trust that you really believe you are doing the right thing for CIty Harvest Church and I respect you for being able to articulate your response to me in such an honorable and respectful demeanor.
Pardon my candidness in certain portions but it is really said without malice.
Thank you."
(Source: http://www.konghee.com/www/2010/03/chc-new-home-suntec-convention-centre/)
Note: Should you have any comments, please do NOT leave them here. I'd encourage you to visit the pastor's blog, read through the blog post as well as the responses, and then leave your comments there. Thanks!
"Amid cheers from the congregation, City Harvest Church (CHC) yesterday announced that it will pay $310 million to become a co-owner of Suntec Singapore, a prime piece of downtown real estate.
Senior pastor Kong Hee broke the news first at CHC's service at its Jurong West building, then later at another service at the Singapore Expo in Changi.
He said CHC had acquired a 'substantial stake in a consortium company that owns 80 per cent of a joint venture fund that owns Suntec Singapore'.
The complex's full name is Suntec Singapore International Convention and Exhibition Centre.
The $310 million includes the cost of acquiring shares in the consortium, rental costs, renovation costs and others.
Suntec Singapore was acquired by ARA Asset Management through the ARA Harmony Fund last year, with its investors comprising Suntec Reit - which holds 20 per cent - and a consortium company which holds 80 per cent."
(Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_499058.html)
On March 8th, 2010, Kong Hee, the senior pastor of CHC posted a blog entry which elaborated more on the matter. By 12 March, 2010, the blog entry attracted more than 160 comments.
One of the most interesting comments was made on March 12th, 2010 at 12.20am, by John, apparently an executive member of CHC, in response to a comment made on March 11th, 2010 at 10.16pm by Derek Dunn, the executive pastor of CHC. John's comment is reproduced below:
"Dear Pastor Derek,
I shall accord you the respect you deserve as an Executive Pastor and return the politeness in my reply to you. I guess it’s not in my place to accept the apology concerning remarks made about the other church which was named openly by Pastor Kong Hee, but I do appreciate the gesture. As to whether it was done intentionally or not, I have to say that you know it’s not the first time. I do hope that we learn to treat our fellow brothers with respect since we are all in the same family. We may differ in our interpretation of scripture, but to categorize them with sinners is very uncalled for.
With regards to the truth behind the Suntec deal, I guess it may be a true fact about the non-disclosure but at the same time it is also a convenient excuse to not divulge very key information that is crucial for the confidence and full-hearted support of this deal by every member. I still do not understand why the leaders agree to a non-disclosure for the sake of Harmony’s shareholders when the members of the church, who are essentially shareholders too, are kept in the dark.
I agree that minority could mean anything from 1 share to 1 short of 50%, but you, of all people, should know that the stake purchased, based on our available funds and based on sound reasoning, is going to be found in the far lower half of that range. Yes, maybe in time to come when the full $310M is raised, but not now and certainly not in the near future.
This is one other reason why people like me are unhappy. To see our leaders say things that is technically not a lie but yet leads to a certain impression. And it results in our members, especially the young ones, going around declaring, blogging, twitting and facebooking we own Suntec City, have 1,000,000 sq ft, we have 78 years lease, the other church will pay rent to us and all for $310M, compared to other church who pay $500M for 30 years (evidenced in contributions above).
Please… even if we have a better deal, should we have such an attitude? This kind of behavior is a reflection of a leadership that is always comparing, competing and always needing to be number one. I know somebody’s got to be number one but it’s the competitiveness and the strong driving ethos of the church that makes many of our members to behave this way.
Why don’t the leadership do something and correct the wrong impressions concerning the building? I’m sure something can be done without infringing on the NDA.
Pastor Derek, with regards to the building, you don’t have to answer since it’ll be difficult to clarify without disclosing confidential info. I trust that you really believe you are doing the right thing for CIty Harvest Church and I respect you for being able to articulate your response to me in such an honorable and respectful demeanor.
Pardon my candidness in certain portions but it is really said without malice.
Thank you."
(Source: http://www.konghee.com/www/2010/03/chc-new-home-suntec-convention-centre/)
Note: Should you have any comments, please do NOT leave them here. I'd encourage you to visit the pastor's blog, read through the blog post as well as the responses, and then leave your comments there. Thanks!
Sunday, April 5, 2009
On false teaching, selfish desires and a real man of God - a dialogue
FALSE TEACHING AND THE SELFISH DESIRES OF MAN
contendforthefaith wrote:
Beware of Wolves in sheep clothings. They will use false teaching to feed the selfish desires of Christian or fake Christian who does not love the Truth but chose to have itchy ears to give themselves to false doctrine so that their desires can be met.
Lip Kee's comment:
I totally agree with you. I also do not condone, support or subscribe to teachings that do nothing but cater to man's selfish desires.
The ministry I love so much in New Creation Church is one that points us to Jesus Christ as our Shepherd, in Whom ALL our needs can be met, in Whom there is no want, in Whom we can find the provision, protection and peace we desire, and to Whom we are to give all the glory and honor.
I don't know about you, but I know and admit that I have needs and desires (of which, I am not proud to say so, many are selfish ones).
The way I see it, having needs and desires is not a sin. It is just human nature. For me, the concern is not so much about us having needs and desires, but more about how we deal with our needs and desires.
Personally, I don't see the desires to be healthy and wealthy as sinful lusts. I see them as normal inborn inclinations of every normal human being - in-built mechanisms of the human brain (designed by God, I would dare say) to ensure the fruitfulness and multiplication of the human race on the Earth - remember God's command to man in Genesis 1:28?
If my ancestors did not have the desires for heath and wealth, and if they did not act on those desires by taking the necessary actions to provide for and to protect themselves, I am sure I won't be here typing this blog entry now. :-)
The way I see it, it is only when people value and pursue those earthly needs and desires above God and His Will and Plan for them (to be loved by God, and in response, to love God and others), that those needs and desires become sinful lusts.
Some of us think that we should teach people to deny or control their needs and desires. While others believe that we should point people to Jesus so that they can find ALL fulfillment and contentment in, and give ALL thanks and honor to Him.
I am with the second group.
THE TEACHING OF "CORRECT" DOCTRINES
contendforthefaith wrote:
Whether you love the pastor anot is not the key issue. The Key issue is the Pastor teaching correct doctrine.
Lip Kee's comment:
I don't have any illusion that the doctrines preached by my pastor in my church are 100% perfect and correct all the time. I know and admit that my church is not a perfect church. I know and admit that my pastor is not a perfect minister of the Word.
But I also know that if not for this imperfect pastor in this imperfect church, I would not have fallen so much in love with Jesus Christ and His Word. That is why I love my pastor and the church he leads so much.
I may decide to go to another church, if you could show me a church in which there is a perfect pastor who preaches perfectly the correct and perfect doctrines all the time. Until then, I think I will stay put, worship joyfully and serve faithfully in New Creation Church under the leadership of Pastor Joseph Prince. :)
contendforthefaith wrote:
Do not deceive yourself. Most prosperity church members like to deceive themselves that prosperity teaching is a good doctrine and that God wants to make Christian get rich. This is FALSE and there are bible proves againist it.
Lip Kee's comment:
I do not know why you label my church as a "prosperity church".
I see my church as a Gospel church, as a Jesus church. In our church, we preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the good news of Jesus Christ, Who is the Lord of ALL - the Lord of every world and every realm, including the spiritual and the physical/material realms.
Do you regard "prosperity" and "wealth" as unholy words? Do you think that people who talk about "prosperity" and "wealth" in church are ungodly people?
Or do you believe that it is possible for a person to talk about "prosperity" and "wealth" in church and still be a Christ-centered, God-glorifying and Holy-Spirit-Honoring person?
I hope you are not offended that I've pray for you, your loved ones, and your church the following prayer (based on 3 John 2): "Beloveds, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your souls prosper".
A REAL MAN OF GOD
contendforthefaith wrote:
If pastor is REAL man of GOD and does not betray Christianity, he should repent and decreas salary at once and not give excuses and blame others and see first. he mentioned that he will see first. It is sad as he does not have a good name now as he have taken 500k for a few yrs, he is a millionaire pastor, unlike Paul and Peter, issiah, who have their head behead, body sawn apart. whether he is real man of GOD, God knows.
Lip Kee's comment:
I don't begrudge a top doctor her million-dollar income, and I don't question her integrity, even though I personally believe that a REAL doctor is supposed be compassionate and must genuinely want to help people even without any monetary compensation.
I don't begrudge a top artist his million dollar paycheck, and I don't cast doubt on his character, even though I believe that a TRUE artist should never paint for the sake of money but only purely for the sake of his love for the arts.
How many times have we seen this happen in the world we are living in: when a man excels in what he loves to do, and is gifted to do, the monetary reward follows.
Michael Jordan did not play basketball because of money. He played because he loved the game of basketball. And because he played well, the money came. David Beckam does not play footaball because of money. He plays football because he is good at it and he enjoys it. And because he excels in the game, the financial rewards follow.
In Pastor Prince, I see a man who started serving God and studying the Bible since he was a teenager and when the church he was serving in was just a small gathering of young believers. I see a TRUE man of God who loves the Lord and loves preaching the Word. I do not see a man who teaches and preaches because of money. I see a REAL pastor who teaches and preaches because he loves doing so, and because he believes he is called by God to do so.
Personally, I greatly respect and honor Pastor Prince, and I think he deserves more than what he has been paid by the church.
If the church were to decide to stop paying him his salary, I will start to give free-will offering to him, over and above my regular tithe to the church. Yes, I will do so, because I respect and honor the man, and I believe in sowing into his ministry.
But this is purely my personal conviction and I don't insist that others must agree with me on this matter.
Stay rested and blessed. :-)
Note: the original discussion took place in the comments page in my other blog hosted at mutliply.com: http://lipkee.multiply.com/journal/item/117
contendforthefaith wrote:
Beware of Wolves in sheep clothings. They will use false teaching to feed the selfish desires of Christian or fake Christian who does not love the Truth but chose to have itchy ears to give themselves to false doctrine so that their desires can be met.
Lip Kee's comment:
I totally agree with you. I also do not condone, support or subscribe to teachings that do nothing but cater to man's selfish desires.
The ministry I love so much in New Creation Church is one that points us to Jesus Christ as our Shepherd, in Whom ALL our needs can be met, in Whom there is no want, in Whom we can find the provision, protection and peace we desire, and to Whom we are to give all the glory and honor.
I don't know about you, but I know and admit that I have needs and desires (of which, I am not proud to say so, many are selfish ones).
The way I see it, having needs and desires is not a sin. It is just human nature. For me, the concern is not so much about us having needs and desires, but more about how we deal with our needs and desires.
Personally, I don't see the desires to be healthy and wealthy as sinful lusts. I see them as normal inborn inclinations of every normal human being - in-built mechanisms of the human brain (designed by God, I would dare say) to ensure the fruitfulness and multiplication of the human race on the Earth - remember God's command to man in Genesis 1:28?
If my ancestors did not have the desires for heath and wealth, and if they did not act on those desires by taking the necessary actions to provide for and to protect themselves, I am sure I won't be here typing this blog entry now. :-)
The way I see it, it is only when people value and pursue those earthly needs and desires above God and His Will and Plan for them (to be loved by God, and in response, to love God and others), that those needs and desires become sinful lusts.
Some of us think that we should teach people to deny or control their needs and desires. While others believe that we should point people to Jesus so that they can find ALL fulfillment and contentment in, and give ALL thanks and honor to Him.
I am with the second group.
THE TEACHING OF "CORRECT" DOCTRINES
contendforthefaith wrote:
Whether you love the pastor anot is not the key issue. The Key issue is the Pastor teaching correct doctrine.
Lip Kee's comment:
I don't have any illusion that the doctrines preached by my pastor in my church are 100% perfect and correct all the time. I know and admit that my church is not a perfect church. I know and admit that my pastor is not a perfect minister of the Word.
But I also know that if not for this imperfect pastor in this imperfect church, I would not have fallen so much in love with Jesus Christ and His Word. That is why I love my pastor and the church he leads so much.
I may decide to go to another church, if you could show me a church in which there is a perfect pastor who preaches perfectly the correct and perfect doctrines all the time. Until then, I think I will stay put, worship joyfully and serve faithfully in New Creation Church under the leadership of Pastor Joseph Prince. :)
contendforthefaith wrote:
Do not deceive yourself. Most prosperity church members like to deceive themselves that prosperity teaching is a good doctrine and that God wants to make Christian get rich. This is FALSE and there are bible proves againist it.
Lip Kee's comment:
I do not know why you label my church as a "prosperity church".
I see my church as a Gospel church, as a Jesus church. In our church, we preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the good news of Jesus Christ, Who is the Lord of ALL - the Lord of every world and every realm, including the spiritual and the physical/material realms.
Do you regard "prosperity" and "wealth" as unholy words? Do you think that people who talk about "prosperity" and "wealth" in church are ungodly people?
Or do you believe that it is possible for a person to talk about "prosperity" and "wealth" in church and still be a Christ-centered, God-glorifying and Holy-Spirit-Honoring person?
I hope you are not offended that I've pray for you, your loved ones, and your church the following prayer (based on 3 John 2): "Beloveds, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your souls prosper".
A REAL MAN OF GOD
contendforthefaith wrote:
If pastor is REAL man of GOD and does not betray Christianity, he should repent and decreas salary at once and not give excuses and blame others and see first. he mentioned that he will see first. It is sad as he does not have a good name now as he have taken 500k for a few yrs, he is a millionaire pastor, unlike Paul and Peter, issiah, who have their head behead, body sawn apart. whether he is real man of GOD, God knows.
Lip Kee's comment:
I don't begrudge a top doctor her million-dollar income, and I don't question her integrity, even though I personally believe that a REAL doctor is supposed be compassionate and must genuinely want to help people even without any monetary compensation.
I don't begrudge a top artist his million dollar paycheck, and I don't cast doubt on his character, even though I believe that a TRUE artist should never paint for the sake of money but only purely for the sake of his love for the arts.
How many times have we seen this happen in the world we are living in: when a man excels in what he loves to do, and is gifted to do, the monetary reward follows.
Michael Jordan did not play basketball because of money. He played because he loved the game of basketball. And because he played well, the money came. David Beckam does not play footaball because of money. He plays football because he is good at it and he enjoys it. And because he excels in the game, the financial rewards follow.
In Pastor Prince, I see a man who started serving God and studying the Bible since he was a teenager and when the church he was serving in was just a small gathering of young believers. I see a TRUE man of God who loves the Lord and loves preaching the Word. I do not see a man who teaches and preaches because of money. I see a REAL pastor who teaches and preaches because he loves doing so, and because he believes he is called by God to do so.
Personally, I greatly respect and honor Pastor Prince, and I think he deserves more than what he has been paid by the church.
If the church were to decide to stop paying him his salary, I will start to give free-will offering to him, over and above my regular tithe to the church. Yes, I will do so, because I respect and honor the man, and I believe in sowing into his ministry.
But this is purely my personal conviction and I don't insist that others must agree with me on this matter.
Stay rested and blessed. :-)
Note: the original discussion took place in the comments page in my other blog hosted at mutliply.com: http://lipkee.multiply.com/journal/item/117
Friday, April 3, 2009
On "controversial" salary , "wrong" explanation, and "incorrect" actions - a dialogue
HOW MUCH SHOULD A PASTOR BE PAID?
maic123 asked:
"Would that...mean that because [Pastor Prince] does such a great job, he should be paid a high salary?"
Lip Kee's comment:
To be sure, I am not the one who decides Pastor Prince's salary. I don't know how his salary was decided. Maybe it is a fixed amount. Maybe it is based on the total collection by the church. I don't know.
As to how much Pastor Prince SHOULD be paid, I suppose everyone will have his own benchmark. Personally, because I received so much from his ministry, I believe he should not be paid less then some of the cabinet ministers in Singapore. But of course, this is just my personal opinion. I don't claim to represent anyone other than myself. :)
I think if I were to ask the question to 100 persons, I would probably get 101 different answers.
How much do you think he should be paid? What is your benchmark? Would you care to explain why you think your benchmark is a better one compared to mine? (For convenience sake and for the purpose of this discussion, I would use a cabinet minister's pay as the benchmark).
WHO USED THE WORD "PEANUTS" TO DESCRIBE THE PAY?
maic123 asked:
"However, for some NCC defenders to claim that because PP brings in 95% of church Rev, because PP is responsible for explosive growth of NCC...etc therefore $500k is peanuts..."
Lip Kee's comment:
I would appreciate it if you could let me know who was the person who used the word "peanuts"? I know I didn't. I know it's a very sensitive word. Almost a vulgar word, I would say.
maic123 asked:
"It is God that gave the growth, it is God that provided the members wealth, it is God that touched members hearts to give. PP is merely the instrument."
Lip Kee's comment:
I totally agree with you. :)
HOW ARE WE TO COMPARE THE REWARDS AMONG THE DIFFERENT SERVERS OF GOD?
maic123 asked:
"If the rational is to reward the instrument, how about the missionaries who sacrified their lives going to dangerous countries to spread the gospel, living in porvety and giving up their all for God, don't they deserve to be paid more than PP?"
Lip Kee's comment:
I am sorry I will not be able to give you an answer.
I respect everyone who serves God. I cherish every precious life.
But I am not the one who decides on Pastor Prince's pay check amount. I am also not the person responsible for determining the pay check (or lack of one) for the missionaries, whom I highly respect.
More importantly, I don't think it is appropriate for me to use the size of monetary reward to measure the worthiness of any servers of God.
Who am I to say that I, who serve as a caregroup leader should deserve to be blessed more than another believer who serves as an usher in church? Who am I to decide that my friend, who is a pastor of a small church in Singapore should deserve more pay than a house church leader in China?
All I can only say is that the missionaries who serve God deserve my full respect. And Pastor Prince deserves my full respect. But of course, this is just my personal opinion. I don't pretend to represent anyone other than myself. :)
maic123 wrote:
Sorry I used the word peanuts. I added the word myself to sort of summarize the meaning I thought some of the defenders of NCC was trying to convey, that 500k salary is nothing compared to what Pastor Prince has done.
Lip Kee's comment:
Apology accepted. :)
A FEW POINTERS ON COMMUNICATING ACCURATELY
Just to share some lessons I've learned about communication (from my past work experiences as a police investigator and an auditor):
Always stick to the facts. Do not assume. Do not speculate. Do not allege. Do not accuse. Make sure. Seek to clarify the facts if unsure. Ask questions. Do research. Check and re-check. Stick to the facts.
And when expressing a personal view or opinion, I would state so clearly. i would qualify my statement using words such as "my view", "my opinion". i would make it clear that I am NOT presenting objective facts, but subjective views and opinions.
If I believe my view or opinion has the potential of being controversial, I would weigh the words I use very carefully. I would remind myself not to come across as being judgmental. I will apply the golden rule and be respectful (not diplomatic) and gentle (not soft).
HOW SHOULD THE CHURCH COUNCIL RESPOND TO THE PRESS QUERY?
maic123 wrote:
However, in the explanation given by the church to justify his salary, the church basically is saying that Pastor Prince is "responsible" for the church income and enriched the church, so he certainly deserves that salary due to the results he is producing. I think that is wrong. It is God that produces the result.
Lip Kee's comment:
Please bear in mind that Deacon Matthew Kang made those statements in response to The Straits Times' query on NCC's staff salary. See the full reply here: http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/media_coverage/NCCreply_to_ST_300309.pdf
Now, let's put yourself in Deacon Matthew Kang's position. The Straits Times refers you to the church's annual report and asks you about the church staff who drew an annual salary of between $500k to $550k as reported in the annual report for the financial year ended 31 March 2008.
How will you respond to the query?
Please bear in mind that you are representing the church, and you are talking to a secular press. Now, what would you say: "No comment"; "No specific reason"; "God told us to give that amount"?
Deacon Matthew Kang had to give an explanation. And he had to give an explanation that the secular press and the public at large could understand. Wouldn't you agree? He had to make a statement. A "sensible and reasonable" one (for the secular press and the general public, not just for the church and believers).
If you were in his shoe, what kind of a "sensible and reasonable" statement would you make?
WOULD A MONTHLY INCOME OF $18,000 STUMBLE YOU?
maic123 wrote:
However, should this salary be too controversial and it causes other brothers to fall in sin, then its better not to exercise that freedom.
Lip Kee's comment:
Hmm...why would a salary that is "too controversial" cause other brothers to "fall in sin"? What kind of "sin" are you referring to? Would you care to explain or clarify?
I suggest we take a step back and look at the bigger picture:
Pastor Prince received an annual salary of around $550k from NCC in the last financial year (i.e. from April 2007 to March 2008). We do not know how much he tithed. He shared with the congregation he gives more than 10% per month. But let's assume he tithed only 10%. In that case, he would have given around $55k to the church from April 2007 to March 2008.
During the period from September 2007 to February 2009, he gave to the church $563k for the building fund (Note: This was also reported in The Straits Times article, but strangely, no one seems to have taken notice of it).
Now, let's assume Pastor Prince received a similar amount of salary and tithed 10% of that amount for the financial year ended March 2009 , he would have received $550k and given $55k for the period from April 2008 to March 2009.
So, based on the assumptions above, over the past two financial years, Pastor Prince would have received a total of $1.1m from NCC, and given $673k back to NCC, giving him a net income from NCC of $427k over two years.
This works out to be around $213.5k per year (or a monthly income of $17.8k). Is this amount still considered too high, or reasonable, or too low? Would this still be "too controversial"? Would it still cause other brothers "to fall into sin"?
WHO HAVE BEEN STUMBLED, TO WHAT EXTENT THEY HAVE BEEN STUMBLED, AND WHAT I THINK WE SHOULD DO FOR THEM
maic123 wrote:
So it is my opinion that the church is incorrect to -
1. Justify his salary using the results Pastor Prince produced.
2. Insisting that he take the salary, as a result causing this controversy. Look at the asiaone forum, I do think it is stumbling some Christians and causing some to be a very poor testimony of what a born again Christian is like.
Lip Kee's comment:
Thanks for sharing your opinion.
I acknowledge that there are quite a lot of people talking about this matter. I also acknowledge that there are Christians who have expressed strong views about the pay Pastor Prince received, and some of the Christians (supporters as well as detractors of NCC) who were involved in the public discussion (e.g. in the AsiaOne forum) had displayed what I believe many of us would consider as immature, irresponsible and un-gentlemanly behavior.
But exactly how many Christians have really been stumbled, and to what extent they have been stumbled, I do not know.
Do you personally know of any Christian who has suffered a crisis of faith, or left church, or abandon God because of the news report? If so, would you care to bring them to my attention or the attention of the church, so that we could help them, counsel them, or pray for them?
Regardless of whether we are able to identify the ones who have been stumbled, my suggestion is that we pray for them, and trust God to strengthen their faith. :)
Shalom.
Note: the original discussion took place in my other blog hosted at multiply.com:
http://lipkee.multiply.com/journal/item/117/Half_a_million_dollar_paid_to_pastor_-_some_discussions?replies_read=9
maic123 asked:
"Would that...mean that because [Pastor Prince] does such a great job, he should be paid a high salary?"
Lip Kee's comment:
To be sure, I am not the one who decides Pastor Prince's salary. I don't know how his salary was decided. Maybe it is a fixed amount. Maybe it is based on the total collection by the church. I don't know.
As to how much Pastor Prince SHOULD be paid, I suppose everyone will have his own benchmark. Personally, because I received so much from his ministry, I believe he should not be paid less then some of the cabinet ministers in Singapore. But of course, this is just my personal opinion. I don't claim to represent anyone other than myself. :)
I think if I were to ask the question to 100 persons, I would probably get 101 different answers.
How much do you think he should be paid? What is your benchmark? Would you care to explain why you think your benchmark is a better one compared to mine? (For convenience sake and for the purpose of this discussion, I would use a cabinet minister's pay as the benchmark).
WHO USED THE WORD "PEANUTS" TO DESCRIBE THE PAY?
maic123 asked:
"However, for some NCC defenders to claim that because PP brings in 95% of church Rev, because PP is responsible for explosive growth of NCC...etc therefore $500k is peanuts..."
Lip Kee's comment:
I would appreciate it if you could let me know who was the person who used the word "peanuts"? I know I didn't. I know it's a very sensitive word. Almost a vulgar word, I would say.
maic123 asked:
"It is God that gave the growth, it is God that provided the members wealth, it is God that touched members hearts to give. PP is merely the instrument."
Lip Kee's comment:
I totally agree with you. :)
HOW ARE WE TO COMPARE THE REWARDS AMONG THE DIFFERENT SERVERS OF GOD?
maic123 asked:
"If the rational is to reward the instrument, how about the missionaries who sacrified their lives going to dangerous countries to spread the gospel, living in porvety and giving up their all for God, don't they deserve to be paid more than PP?"
Lip Kee's comment:
I am sorry I will not be able to give you an answer.
I respect everyone who serves God. I cherish every precious life.
But I am not the one who decides on Pastor Prince's pay check amount. I am also not the person responsible for determining the pay check (or lack of one) for the missionaries, whom I highly respect.
More importantly, I don't think it is appropriate for me to use the size of monetary reward to measure the worthiness of any servers of God.
Who am I to say that I, who serve as a caregroup leader should deserve to be blessed more than another believer who serves as an usher in church? Who am I to decide that my friend, who is a pastor of a small church in Singapore should deserve more pay than a house church leader in China?
All I can only say is that the missionaries who serve God deserve my full respect. And Pastor Prince deserves my full respect. But of course, this is just my personal opinion. I don't pretend to represent anyone other than myself. :)
maic123 wrote:
Sorry I used the word peanuts. I added the word myself to sort of summarize the meaning I thought some of the defenders of NCC was trying to convey, that 500k salary is nothing compared to what Pastor Prince has done.
Lip Kee's comment:
Apology accepted. :)
A FEW POINTERS ON COMMUNICATING ACCURATELY
Just to share some lessons I've learned about communication (from my past work experiences as a police investigator and an auditor):
Always stick to the facts. Do not assume. Do not speculate. Do not allege. Do not accuse. Make sure. Seek to clarify the facts if unsure. Ask questions. Do research. Check and re-check. Stick to the facts.
And when expressing a personal view or opinion, I would state so clearly. i would qualify my statement using words such as "my view", "my opinion". i would make it clear that I am NOT presenting objective facts, but subjective views and opinions.
If I believe my view or opinion has the potential of being controversial, I would weigh the words I use very carefully. I would remind myself not to come across as being judgmental. I will apply the golden rule and be respectful (not diplomatic) and gentle (not soft).
HOW SHOULD THE CHURCH COUNCIL RESPOND TO THE PRESS QUERY?
maic123 wrote:
However, in the explanation given by the church to justify his salary, the church basically is saying that Pastor Prince is "responsible" for the church income and enriched the church, so he certainly deserves that salary due to the results he is producing. I think that is wrong. It is God that produces the result.
Lip Kee's comment:
Please bear in mind that Deacon Matthew Kang made those statements in response to The Straits Times' query on NCC's staff salary. See the full reply here: http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/media_coverage/NCCreply_to_ST_300309.pdf
Now, let's put yourself in Deacon Matthew Kang's position. The Straits Times refers you to the church's annual report and asks you about the church staff who drew an annual salary of between $500k to $550k as reported in the annual report for the financial year ended 31 March 2008.
How will you respond to the query?
Please bear in mind that you are representing the church, and you are talking to a secular press. Now, what would you say: "No comment"; "No specific reason"; "God told us to give that amount"?
Deacon Matthew Kang had to give an explanation. And he had to give an explanation that the secular press and the public at large could understand. Wouldn't you agree? He had to make a statement. A "sensible and reasonable" one (for the secular press and the general public, not just for the church and believers).
If you were in his shoe, what kind of a "sensible and reasonable" statement would you make?
WOULD A MONTHLY INCOME OF $18,000 STUMBLE YOU?
maic123 wrote:
However, should this salary be too controversial and it causes other brothers to fall in sin, then its better not to exercise that freedom.
Lip Kee's comment:
Hmm...why would a salary that is "too controversial" cause other brothers to "fall in sin"? What kind of "sin" are you referring to? Would you care to explain or clarify?
I suggest we take a step back and look at the bigger picture:
Pastor Prince received an annual salary of around $550k from NCC in the last financial year (i.e. from April 2007 to March 2008). We do not know how much he tithed. He shared with the congregation he gives more than 10% per month. But let's assume he tithed only 10%. In that case, he would have given around $55k to the church from April 2007 to March 2008.
During the period from September 2007 to February 2009, he gave to the church $563k for the building fund (Note: This was also reported in The Straits Times article, but strangely, no one seems to have taken notice of it).
Now, let's assume Pastor Prince received a similar amount of salary and tithed 10% of that amount for the financial year ended March 2009 , he would have received $550k and given $55k for the period from April 2008 to March 2009.
So, based on the assumptions above, over the past two financial years, Pastor Prince would have received a total of $1.1m from NCC, and given $673k back to NCC, giving him a net income from NCC of $427k over two years.
This works out to be around $213.5k per year (or a monthly income of $17.8k). Is this amount still considered too high, or reasonable, or too low? Would this still be "too controversial"? Would it still cause other brothers "to fall into sin"?
WHO HAVE BEEN STUMBLED, TO WHAT EXTENT THEY HAVE BEEN STUMBLED, AND WHAT I THINK WE SHOULD DO FOR THEM
maic123 wrote:
So it is my opinion that the church is incorrect to -
1. Justify his salary using the results Pastor Prince produced.
2. Insisting that he take the salary, as a result causing this controversy. Look at the asiaone forum, I do think it is stumbling some Christians and causing some to be a very poor testimony of what a born again Christian is like.
Lip Kee's comment:
Thanks for sharing your opinion.
I acknowledge that there are quite a lot of people talking about this matter. I also acknowledge that there are Christians who have expressed strong views about the pay Pastor Prince received, and some of the Christians (supporters as well as detractors of NCC) who were involved in the public discussion (e.g. in the AsiaOne forum) had displayed what I believe many of us would consider as immature, irresponsible and un-gentlemanly behavior.
But exactly how many Christians have really been stumbled, and to what extent they have been stumbled, I do not know.
Do you personally know of any Christian who has suffered a crisis of faith, or left church, or abandon God because of the news report? If so, would you care to bring them to my attention or the attention of the church, so that we could help them, counsel them, or pray for them?
Regardless of whether we are able to identify the ones who have been stumbled, my suggestion is that we pray for them, and trust God to strengthen their faith. :)
Shalom.
Note: the original discussion took place in my other blog hosted at multiply.com:
http://lipkee.multiply.com/journal/item/117/Half_a_million_dollar_paid_to_pastor_-_some_discussions?replies_read=9
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Why I love and support my church and my pastor
Because the loveliness of the Lord Jesus Christ is so gloriously revealed and exalted in New Creation Church by Pastor Prince.
Because the perfection of the Lord's work on the Cross is so clearly explained and expounded upon in New Creation Church by Pastor Prince.
Because of the teaching and preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ such as the following:
- Will the real Christianity please stand up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10lue7bhcK0&feature=related
- Supernatural transformation and holiness
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYoXwPQDYoY&feature=related
- Aleph Tav - Jesus' signature in the Bible
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6470TSfP9Pk&feature=channel_page
- The root cause of your problem is condemnation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCUby8b1zl4&feature=related
- Grace flows in worry-free areas of your life:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEgNqDcMXYE&feature=related
Because in Singapore and all around the world, people's lives are being impacted and transformed by the ministry:
- Read the comments left on the wall of Joseph Prince Ministry facebook homepage:
http://www.facebook.com/wall.php?id=5718674446
- Read the readers' reviews on the book "Destined to Reign":
* amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/Destined-Reign-Effortless-Wholeness-Victorious/product-reviews/1577949323/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
* christianbook.com: http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product/971615642?item_no=949329&show_all_cr=1&event=PR#customer_reviews
* harrisonhouse.com: http://www.harrisonhouse.com/BookDetails.aspx?ISBN=9781577949329
- Read the testimonies from people blessed by the church and the ministry:
* New Creation Church: http://www.newcreation.org.sg/testimonies/testimonies.htm
* Joseph Prince Ministry: http://www.josephprince.org/resources/praisereports/praisereports.htm
- Read online report and blog post on the influence of Pastor Prince's ministry on other ministries and pastors:
* christianpost.com: http://sg.christianpost.com/dbase.php?cat=education&id=701
* blogpastor.com: http://www.blogpastor.net/2009/03/02/eating-the-flesh-of-joseph-prince/
Because God loves His Son Jesus Christ, and God loves New Creation Church and Pastor Prince, and God loves you and I too. :)
Shalom!
Because the perfection of the Lord's work on the Cross is so clearly explained and expounded upon in New Creation Church by Pastor Prince.
Because of the teaching and preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ such as the following:
- Will the real Christianity please stand up:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10lue7bhcK0&feature=related
- Supernatural transformation and holiness
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYoXwPQDYoY&feature=related
- Aleph Tav - Jesus' signature in the Bible
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6470TSfP9Pk&feature=channel_page
- The root cause of your problem is condemnation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCUby8b1zl4&feature=related
- Grace flows in worry-free areas of your life:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEgNqDcMXYE&feature=related
Because in Singapore and all around the world, people's lives are being impacted and transformed by the ministry:
- Read the comments left on the wall of Joseph Prince Ministry facebook homepage:
http://www.facebook.com/wall.php?id=5718674446
- Read the readers' reviews on the book "Destined to Reign":
* amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/Destined-Reign-Effortless-Wholeness-Victorious/product-reviews/1577949323/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
* christianbook.com: http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product/971615642?item_no=949329&show_all_cr=1&event=PR#customer_reviews
* harrisonhouse.com: http://www.harrisonhouse.com/BookDetails.aspx?ISBN=9781577949329
- Read the testimonies from people blessed by the church and the ministry:
* New Creation Church: http://www.newcreation.org.sg/testimonies/testimonies.htm
* Joseph Prince Ministry: http://www.josephprince.org/resources/praisereports/praisereports.htm
- Read online report and blog post on the influence of Pastor Prince's ministry on other ministries and pastors:
* christianpost.com: http://sg.christianpost.com/dbase.php?cat=education&id=701
* blogpastor.com: http://www.blogpastor.net/2009/03/02/eating-the-flesh-of-joseph-prince/
Because God loves His Son Jesus Christ, and God loves New Creation Church and Pastor Prince, and God loves you and I too. :)
Shalom!
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
The Sumptuous Dinner and the Chef - a Parable
Just like to share with you a brilliant parable written by my fellow blogger friend Stanley Wong. Enjoy! : )
----------------------------------------
A FAMILY DINNER
originally published in Stanley's blog.
Last night, to celebrate April Fool's Day, I took my family out for dinner at a very nice restaurant in the city. The waitress led us to a table and we sat down and waited for her to hand us the menu. However after some time, we still did not receive the menu. I managed to catch the attention of the waitress and asked her for the menu. She replied,"I am sorry, sir. In honour of April Fool's Day, our restaurant is serving only the Chef's Special Set Dinner today. Your dinner will be served shortly."
True enough, while the waitress was still explaining to us, the first dish arrived. All in all, we were served a seven course dinner plus dessert (mango pudding). Man, was the dinner good! We thoroughly enjoyed the food and my kids were pestering me to come again soon, even though we still haven't left the restaurant yet!
Then suddenly, something caught my mind: I had not asked about the price of the dinner! I quickly signaled to the waitress for the bill and crossed my fingers that I have enough money in my wallet to pay for it. To my surprise, the waitress walked over empty-handed and said,"We have no fixed price for our set dinner, sir. You just pay us whatever you want."
My surprise turned into shock. I thought this was too good to be true. Could this be an April Fool's Day joke? I asked,"Is it ok even if I pay $2?" "Yes, sir. Any amount you pay is fine with us." came the smiling reply. Of course, I didn't pay $2 but I did give what I thought was an appropriate amount.
I asked the waitress,"I am curious. Since the customer can pay any amount he wants, how much does your chef actually earn a year?" She replied, "$500,000". I was flabbergasted; "What? $500,000 just to cook food? This is too much! I am never coming to this restaurant again!"
My dear wife (God bless her) said to me,"Darling, we really enjoyed the dinner just now, didn't we? How much did you pay for it? Just $20, not $500,000! For a seven course dinner plus dessert! Why should you be concerned about how much the chef earns?"
----------------------------------------
A FAMILY DINNER
originally published in Stanley's blog.
Last night, to celebrate April Fool's Day, I took my family out for dinner at a very nice restaurant in the city. The waitress led us to a table and we sat down and waited for her to hand us the menu. However after some time, we still did not receive the menu. I managed to catch the attention of the waitress and asked her for the menu. She replied,"I am sorry, sir. In honour of April Fool's Day, our restaurant is serving only the Chef's Special Set Dinner today. Your dinner will be served shortly."
True enough, while the waitress was still explaining to us, the first dish arrived. All in all, we were served a seven course dinner plus dessert (mango pudding). Man, was the dinner good! We thoroughly enjoyed the food and my kids were pestering me to come again soon, even though we still haven't left the restaurant yet!
Then suddenly, something caught my mind: I had not asked about the price of the dinner! I quickly signaled to the waitress for the bill and crossed my fingers that I have enough money in my wallet to pay for it. To my surprise, the waitress walked over empty-handed and said,"We have no fixed price for our set dinner, sir. You just pay us whatever you want."
My surprise turned into shock. I thought this was too good to be true. Could this be an April Fool's Day joke? I asked,"Is it ok even if I pay $2?" "Yes, sir. Any amount you pay is fine with us." came the smiling reply. Of course, I didn't pay $2 but I did give what I thought was an appropriate amount.
I asked the waitress,"I am curious. Since the customer can pay any amount he wants, how much does your chef actually earn a year?" She replied, "$500,000". I was flabbergasted; "What? $500,000 just to cook food? This is too much! I am never coming to this restaurant again!"
My dear wife (God bless her) said to me,"Darling, we really enjoyed the dinner just now, didn't we? How much did you pay for it? Just $20, not $500,000! For a seven course dinner plus dessert! Why should you be concerned about how much the chef earns?"
Monday, March 30, 2009
$0.5m annual salary for pastor - a discussion
BoredToDeath asked:
Without PP, how much do you think the church can generate? More or less than GOD?
Lip Kee replied:
To be totally honest with you, I believe that without Pastor Prince, NCC will not be where it is right now.
This is just a personal conviction. I cannot prove or disprove it. (In a way, this is similar to some people's view that Singapore will not be where it is now without MM Lee. This view too cannot be proven or unproven).
Personally, I am convinced that NCC is growing so rapidly and the people are giving so willingly and generously because Pastor Prince is able to reveal and exalt Jesus Christ so effectively.
Again, this is just my personal conviction. That is why I am still a member of the church and I am regularly giving a good portion of my income to the church.
I am not here to debate or challenge anyone who holds a different view from me. I am just here to present a view - from a church member's perspective.
I just want to let the readers here know that there are people like me, a member of the church who is totally happy with how things are. :-)
And as I've written previously, anyone who is in the church and is unhappy about the pastor's salary can always choose to reduce/stop his/her giving to the church or to leave the church.
And anyone who is currently NOT in the church and are NOT giving to the church, is free to continue to NOT to step into the church and NOT to give a single cent.
Democratic, yeah? :-)
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=10
-------------------------
As He Is So Am I commented:
Where is God in this, I thought it was God who blesses a church and therefore it grows. Or is it because someone reveals christ?
Lip Kee replied:
I agree with you totally it is God who blesses the church.
The way I see it, for NCC, God blesses us with a gifted preacher who is able to effectively reveal and exalt the Lord Jesus Christ in people's lives. And through this gift of a preacher, NCC is blessed and is a blessing. Hence, the growth and influence.
Please note that I am NOT claiming that Pastor Prince is THE only gifted preacher. I believe there are many gifted preachers, and NCC is blessed with one of them.
As He Is So Am I commented:
As for voting why not vote with a real ballot. Isn't that what a vote is for? I believe that the 20000 church goers should have option (c)
(c) submit a vote of approval or rejection of JP pay.
(d) if unsatisfied, submit a vote of no confidence in the council and elect a board consisting solely of independent and unpaid volunteers.
But will the 20000 pull this off? Legally is this possible?
Lip Kee replied:
NCC has voting members who attend the AGM and vote on matters concerning the church, including that of the appointment of the church council members. The council members are the ones who decide on the salary of the pastor.
I believe this kind of an arrangement is not unlike what is being done for many other church and non-church organizations.
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=11
-----------------------
As He Is So Am I commented:
So option (c) is not a valid option at this time? Which brings me to the following questions
Firstly I would like to ask how council members are selected and elected since they determine the salary of the pastor.
Secondly in all my years at NCC I have never voted, so please enlighten me how does one qualify to be a voting member and how many voting members does NCC have?
And as a member of the church, I am asking you why not have a third option of voting on it. If 20000 agree to give x amount to the senior pastor, no one in Singapore can continue to complain.
Lip Kee replied:
These are valid questions.
Different churches adopt different types of system of governance. Prebyeterian churches have theirs which differs from the Methodist churches.
NCC has chosen a system of governance that empowers voting members to choose the members of a church council who deliberates and decides on matters concerning the church.
There are many practical issues to consider, e.g. What matter should be decided by the church council and which issues should be decided by a church-wide voting? Who among the 20,000 should be considered a member? How should membership be determined - by attendance/ commitment in terms of serving/ tithing record etc? How does the church decide on granting voting membership?
If you are a member of the church, you may want to approach the church office to clarify these matters. I don't think this is the proper forum for this discussion.
In any case, if a person who does not attend NCC and who did not give a single cent to the church chooses to be unhappy and complain about the pastor's pay, there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it, since this is a free country. :-)
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=12
-----------------------------
Magenta commented:
Yes, never voted in my life... be it for the elections, at shareholders' meeting or church councils. Not that it matters anyway.... but NCCians are practically free to vote with their feet or pocket.
Lip Kee's response:
I agree with you.
I have voted and I have raised questions during the AGMs I've attended.
But I totally agree with you that the most practical and the best way to vote is with our pocket and our feet.
If we don't like what we see or hear in NCC, we can simply choose to stop dropping those cash/cheques into the bags/boxes, or we can simply stop going to the church.
As far as I know, no one is forcing any person to go to NCC or to give to the church.
Just to clarify in case there is any misinformation/ misunderstanding, in NCC, we don't use GIRO for our giving - i.e. we don't have our money deducted from our bank accounts automatically every month. The way we give in NCC is by physically dropping cash or cheques into the tithing/ offering bags/boxes when we are in church.
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=13
------------------------
As He Is So Am I commented:
I find it a bit disheartnening that the only recourse to the 20000 givers who gave to the building is to vote with their feet.
If we are committed enough to give to the building and commited enough to tithe, why are we not enabled to vote on such a matter of conscience?
Lip Kee replied:
To be very honest with you, even though I am a member with voting right at the church AGMs, I still believe that the most practical and effective way to vote is with my time and money I decide to commit to the church.
When we talk about voting, we need to bear in mind the practical limitations and implications. Do we really want to get involved in the daily operational and administrative matters of the church? Do we want all 20,000 of us to review and vote on the pay of all the full-time staff, which pastor's salary to be raised and by how much, which overseas ministries to sow into, which charities to support, which guest speakers to invite, what type of renovation/construction works on our old and new venues be granted the go-ahead etc. etc. Where do we start and stop?
For me, I choose to trust in the Shepherd our Lord Jesus Christ to watch over our church, the church council and our pastors. If I sense that the church leaders are no longer doing God's work but are doing things for ulterior motives, I will not hesitate to leave the church.
Nevertheless, if you strongly wish to exercise church membership rights and responsibilities, I would encourage you to check and clarify the matter with the church office directly.
Shalom!
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?p=229248&posted=1#post229248
Without PP, how much do you think the church can generate? More or less than GOD?
Lip Kee replied:
To be totally honest with you, I believe that without Pastor Prince, NCC will not be where it is right now.
This is just a personal conviction. I cannot prove or disprove it. (In a way, this is similar to some people's view that Singapore will not be where it is now without MM Lee. This view too cannot be proven or unproven).
Personally, I am convinced that NCC is growing so rapidly and the people are giving so willingly and generously because Pastor Prince is able to reveal and exalt Jesus Christ so effectively.
Again, this is just my personal conviction. That is why I am still a member of the church and I am regularly giving a good portion of my income to the church.
I am not here to debate or challenge anyone who holds a different view from me. I am just here to present a view - from a church member's perspective.
I just want to let the readers here know that there are people like me, a member of the church who is totally happy with how things are. :-)
And as I've written previously, anyone who is in the church and is unhappy about the pastor's salary can always choose to reduce/stop his/her giving to the church or to leave the church.
And anyone who is currently NOT in the church and are NOT giving to the church, is free to continue to NOT to step into the church and NOT to give a single cent.
Democratic, yeah? :-)
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=10
-------------------------
As He Is So Am I commented:
Where is God in this, I thought it was God who blesses a church and therefore it grows. Or is it because someone reveals christ?
Lip Kee replied:
I agree with you totally it is God who blesses the church.
The way I see it, for NCC, God blesses us with a gifted preacher who is able to effectively reveal and exalt the Lord Jesus Christ in people's lives. And through this gift of a preacher, NCC is blessed and is a blessing. Hence, the growth and influence.
Please note that I am NOT claiming that Pastor Prince is THE only gifted preacher. I believe there are many gifted preachers, and NCC is blessed with one of them.
As He Is So Am I commented:
As for voting why not vote with a real ballot. Isn't that what a vote is for? I believe that the 20000 church goers should have option (c)
(c) submit a vote of approval or rejection of JP pay.
(d) if unsatisfied, submit a vote of no confidence in the council and elect a board consisting solely of independent and unpaid volunteers.
But will the 20000 pull this off? Legally is this possible?
Lip Kee replied:
NCC has voting members who attend the AGM and vote on matters concerning the church, including that of the appointment of the church council members. The council members are the ones who decide on the salary of the pastor.
I believe this kind of an arrangement is not unlike what is being done for many other church and non-church organizations.
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=11
-----------------------
As He Is So Am I commented:
So option (c) is not a valid option at this time? Which brings me to the following questions
Firstly I would like to ask how council members are selected and elected since they determine the salary of the pastor.
Secondly in all my years at NCC I have never voted, so please enlighten me how does one qualify to be a voting member and how many voting members does NCC have?
And as a member of the church, I am asking you why not have a third option of voting on it. If 20000 agree to give x amount to the senior pastor, no one in Singapore can continue to complain.
Lip Kee replied:
These are valid questions.
Different churches adopt different types of system of governance. Prebyeterian churches have theirs which differs from the Methodist churches.
NCC has chosen a system of governance that empowers voting members to choose the members of a church council who deliberates and decides on matters concerning the church.
There are many practical issues to consider, e.g. What matter should be decided by the church council and which issues should be decided by a church-wide voting? Who among the 20,000 should be considered a member? How should membership be determined - by attendance/ commitment in terms of serving/ tithing record etc? How does the church decide on granting voting membership?
If you are a member of the church, you may want to approach the church office to clarify these matters. I don't think this is the proper forum for this discussion.
In any case, if a person who does not attend NCC and who did not give a single cent to the church chooses to be unhappy and complain about the pastor's pay, there is absolutely nothing anyone can do about it, since this is a free country. :-)
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=12
-----------------------------
Magenta commented:
Yes, never voted in my life... be it for the elections, at shareholders' meeting or church councils. Not that it matters anyway.... but NCCians are practically free to vote with their feet or pocket.
Lip Kee's response:
I agree with you.
I have voted and I have raised questions during the AGMs I've attended.
But I totally agree with you that the most practical and the best way to vote is with our pocket and our feet.
If we don't like what we see or hear in NCC, we can simply choose to stop dropping those cash/cheques into the bags/boxes, or we can simply stop going to the church.
As far as I know, no one is forcing any person to go to NCC or to give to the church.
Just to clarify in case there is any misinformation/ misunderstanding, in NCC, we don't use GIRO for our giving - i.e. we don't have our money deducted from our bank accounts automatically every month. The way we give in NCC is by physically dropping cash or cheques into the tithing/ offering bags/boxes when we are in church.
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?t=18932&page=13
------------------------
As He Is So Am I commented:
I find it a bit disheartnening that the only recourse to the 20000 givers who gave to the building is to vote with their feet.
If we are committed enough to give to the building and commited enough to tithe, why are we not enabled to vote on such a matter of conscience?
Lip Kee replied:
To be very honest with you, even though I am a member with voting right at the church AGMs, I still believe that the most practical and effective way to vote is with my time and money I decide to commit to the church.
When we talk about voting, we need to bear in mind the practical limitations and implications. Do we really want to get involved in the daily operational and administrative matters of the church? Do we want all 20,000 of us to review and vote on the pay of all the full-time staff, which pastor's salary to be raised and by how much, which overseas ministries to sow into, which charities to support, which guest speakers to invite, what type of renovation/construction works on our old and new venues be granted the go-ahead etc. etc. Where do we start and stop?
For me, I choose to trust in the Shepherd our Lord Jesus Christ to watch over our church, the church council and our pastors. If I sense that the church leaders are no longer doing God's work but are doing things for ulterior motives, I will not hesitate to leave the church.
Nevertheless, if you strongly wish to exercise church membership rights and responsibilities, I would encourage you to check and clarify the matter with the church office directly.
Shalom!
Note: the original discussion took place in the AsiaOne forum page:
http://forums.asiaone.com/showthread.php?p=229248&posted=1#post229248
Sunday, March 29, 2009
$0.5m annual salary for pastor - some thoughts
Church leader gets $500k
The Straits Times
March 30, 2009
By Theresa Tan & Melissa Sim
THE New Creation Church, which made headlines for raising $19 million on one Sunday last month for its upcoming multi-million dollar building, pays good money to its staff too.
The independent church paid one employee between $500,001 and $550,000 in its last financial year, checks by The Straits Times showed.
The church did not confirm if the amount went to its leader, Senior Pastor Joseph Prince, but told The Straits Times that its policy is to 'recognise and reward key contributors to the church and Senior Pastor Prince is the main pillar of our church's growth and revenue'.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_356328.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the full article, which was carried on the front page and continued on page A6 of The Straits Times on Monday, March 30, 2008, Deacon Mathew Kang made the following statement:"Senior Pastor Prince is the key man responsible for bringing in about 95 per cent of our church's income. I must concede that he has enriched the church and not the other way round".
Some critics took issue with that statement. They argued that the church is not about growth and revenue.
I agree with them. The church is not about growth and revenue. And contrary to what some critics may think, in my view, the church is also not about charity and helping people.
For me, the church is ALL about revealing and exalting Christ. I believe that when Jesus Christ is revealed and exalted, people's lives are transformed and they are helped. And when people see Jesus and find help in Him in a church, the church cannot help but grow and prosper.
Pastor Prince has been doing a tremendous job at revealing and exalting Jesus Christ. As a result, people are being helped, and the church is growing and prospering.
Should Pastor Prince not be rewarded for what he has done and is doing for the church and the people? Of course he should. I believe few of us in the church would disagree on this. The question is: how much?
Is the half a million pay package too much or too little?
I agree with Deacon Mathew's view that it is Pastor Prince who enriches the church rather than the other way round. Let's keep in mind that in the previous financial year, the annual pay for Pastor Prince constitutes a mere 1% of the total annual revenue of the church. Now, let us ask ourselves: would the church be able to generate a revenue of $54m, if not for Pastor Prince's teaching and preaching ministry?
If there were to be people in the church who think that the church is paying too much to the pastor, and they are unhappy about it, I believe they are free to vote on the matter, either:
(a) with their hands - i.e. by stopping or reducing their giving to the church; or
(b) with their feet - i.e. by leaving the church.
As for me, I trust the church council's wisdom and decision on the matter.
And I am glad to continue to call New Creation Church my home church and to carry on with my usual tithing and offering :-)
The Straits Times
March 30, 2009
By Theresa Tan & Melissa Sim
THE New Creation Church, which made headlines for raising $19 million on one Sunday last month for its upcoming multi-million dollar building, pays good money to its staff too.
The independent church paid one employee between $500,001 and $550,000 in its last financial year, checks by The Straits Times showed.
The church did not confirm if the amount went to its leader, Senior Pastor Joseph Prince, but told The Straits Times that its policy is to 'recognise and reward key contributors to the church and Senior Pastor Prince is the main pillar of our church's growth and revenue'.
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_356328.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the full article, which was carried on the front page and continued on page A6 of The Straits Times on Monday, March 30, 2008, Deacon Mathew Kang made the following statement:"Senior Pastor Prince is the key man responsible for bringing in about 95 per cent of our church's income. I must concede that he has enriched the church and not the other way round".
Some critics took issue with that statement. They argued that the church is not about growth and revenue.
I agree with them. The church is not about growth and revenue. And contrary to what some critics may think, in my view, the church is also not about charity and helping people.
For me, the church is ALL about revealing and exalting Christ. I believe that when Jesus Christ is revealed and exalted, people's lives are transformed and they are helped. And when people see Jesus and find help in Him in a church, the church cannot help but grow and prosper.
Pastor Prince has been doing a tremendous job at revealing and exalting Jesus Christ. As a result, people are being helped, and the church is growing and prospering.
Should Pastor Prince not be rewarded for what he has done and is doing for the church and the people? Of course he should. I believe few of us in the church would disagree on this. The question is: how much?
Is the half a million pay package too much or too little?
I agree with Deacon Mathew's view that it is Pastor Prince who enriches the church rather than the other way round. Let's keep in mind that in the previous financial year, the annual pay for Pastor Prince constitutes a mere 1% of the total annual revenue of the church. Now, let us ask ourselves: would the church be able to generate a revenue of $54m, if not for Pastor Prince's teaching and preaching ministry?
If there were to be people in the church who think that the church is paying too much to the pastor, and they are unhappy about it, I believe they are free to vote on the matter, either:
(a) with their hands - i.e. by stopping or reducing their giving to the church; or
(b) with their feet - i.e. by leaving the church.
As for me, I trust the church council's wisdom and decision on the matter.
And I am glad to continue to call New Creation Church my home church and to carry on with my usual tithing and offering :-)
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Perversion of the gospel? - a discussion
TW wrote:
You know JP and NCC clearly teaches this false "Gospel" below:
"Accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour will not only save you from sin and hell, but also give to you health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more." http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/we_believe/cross.htm
-------------------
Lip Kee replied:
Why would proclaiming that "Accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour will not only save you from sin and hell, but also give to you health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more" be tantamount to preaching a false "Gospel"?
Do we see Christ as everything we need?
Would you agree that Jesus Christ is:
- the Lord who is able and willing to heal;
- the joy of all the Earth;
- the Prince of Peace,
- God's perfect love personified;
- our hope of glory
- the beloved in whom we are accepted;
- the Lord who enables us to be able and willing to give (in terms of material possessions, time, efforts, love) generously to help others;
- the source of all good things
The way I see it, receiving Jesus as my Lord and Savior means that I also receive Him as my Lord of ALL, my Savior to whom I turn to for any and every kind of challenges I face in life.
When I say that take Jesus as my EVERYTHING, I mean just that: EVERYTHING - including health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the ability to be generous with others (with our time, our energy, our material possessions), and all good things I can ever ask or think.
So, in that sense, I really don't see what's wrong with the statement.
Would you like to point out which portion(s) of the statement you find problematic or false?
--------------------------
TW wrote:
LipKee,
When anyone declares a "gospel" inviting one come to Jesus to get "favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more.", one declares a false gospel and a false christ.
COVETOUSNESS is IDOLATRY ! Colossians 3:5
"It's idolatry because the contentment that the heart should be getting from God it starts to get from something else.So covetousness is desiring something so much that you lose your contentment in God. Or: losing your contentment in God so that you start to seek it elsewhere. Covetousness is a heart divided between two gods. So Paul calls it idolatry. "
God is to be magnified by the offensive and "foolishness" nature of true Gospel of Jesus Christ. God is to be desired above ALL, Christ is to be desired above ALL. God chose the foolish Gospel of a despised and suffering Christ. God sovereignly by grace draws and calls a sinner to come to Christ by allowing the sinner to see the beauty of the Cross of Christ. "For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men." 1Cor 1:18, 20.
When one comes to Jesus Christ, one comes to Jesus Christ ALONE. When one comes to seek $$$, one come to a false Christ or an "idolatry" offering the prospect of $$$.
This "gospel" from JP and NCC is the sad perversion of true Gospel of Jesus Christ. The false "gospel" from JP and NCC robbed Christ of His due glory. "Accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour will not only save you from sin and hell, but also give to you health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more." http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/we_believe/cross.htm
-----------------------------
Lip Kee replied:
TW,
We all go through different stages in our walk with God, don't we?
A journey - from being self-occupied to being Christ-occupied
I don't know about you, but I did not start out my faith walk with Jesus because I had a pure heart that appreciated Him and Him alone, without any trace of selfishness. No. I started my walk with God like a typical self-centered child, who thought only about what I needed and wanted. I wanted to be saved. I wanted to enjoy heaven. I wanted God to hear and answer my prayers. It was all about ME AND MY BLESSINGS.
As I matured more in the Lord, I began to think more about how I can be a blessing to others. I started to find ways to serve and to give to people - first just within the church community, and eventually beyond the church to the society/ world at large. It became more about OTHERS AND HOW I COULD BE A BLESSING TO THEM.
After coming to NCC (in late 2002)and sitting under the ministry of Pastor Prince, I began to see more and more of how beautiful Jesus is in and of Himself, and I started to really appreciate how truly amazing His grace is. As I learned more and more about the goodness and generosity of my Savior and Lord - Who not only blesses me but also allow me the privilege of being a blessings to others, my focus started to be more and more on Him alone. More and more, it is about JESUS AND ONLY JESUS.
From being purely self-occupied, to being more others-occupied, to being more and more Christ- occupied, it has been a journey for me.
I don't claim speak for every believer, but at least for myself, and for many believers that I know personally in NCC, our faith walks are a journey we are taking, and along this journey of faith, NCC has played and is playing an important role in helping us becoming less self-occupied, less others-occupied, but more Christ occupied. :)
Revisiting the definition of wealth and prosperity
I would really want to encourage you to see "wealth" and "prosperity" not just in terms of money and material possessions. If you find those two words offensive, may I suggest we use the phrase "more than enough for ourselves that we may give generously to others". How about that? :)
I don't have a million dollars in my bank accounts. But I believe I have more than enough to give to others. And because I believe so, I give generously.
If and when I find myself facing financial challenges (which I had, several times in my life), I continue to hold on to the truth that the Lord is my Shepherd and I shall not want. I continue to be generous in my giving because I truly believe that I have more than enough because Jesus Christ is my Shepherd.
(Note: I am not giving you mere theoretical arguments here. I am sharing my life and how I actually live it. If you so demand, I will gladly provide you with the evidences of my giving of money and time to churches and various charitable organizations over the years)
On the covetousness of man and the Solution
Man has his needs and desires. Every Man seeks to be satisfied. Every Man seeks to blessed with good things. Man, by his very nature, covets. How would you address this problem of Man's covetousness?
I suggest the solution is to point man to Christ. Because in Christ, every need and desire of Man is fully met. I believe what Man really covets is the Presence of Christ.
And honestly, I don't see anything wrong with me coveting the Presence of Christ, do you?
-------------------
TW wrote:
Hi LipKee,
I appreciate your attempt to share your experiences, I do not intend to cast aspersion on your experiences. The issue is at hand is the perversion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The sad perversion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as typified by the teaching from JP's book below, how can any Christian who truly believe and love the Gospel of Jesus Christ not feel grieve and rightly conclude that "NCC as MAN-focused: always preaching about MY blessing of health, MY blessing of wealth, My blessings - it's all about ME, ME, ME." ??
"My friend, the moment you are born again, you have Jesus in your life. And when you have Him in your life, get ready to prosper for gold will come to you! But don’t look for the gold, look to Jesus - He is the power to get wealth. (Deuteronomy 8:18) The presence of the Son of the living God in your life attracts prosperity. Because of His grace toward us, Jesus though He was rich, was made poor at the cross for your sake so that “you through His poverty might become rich.
Beloved, when you have Jesus in your life and when you know that He has paid the price for your prosperity, you can boldly declare, “Jesus was made poor at the cross for my sake so that through His poverty, I am made rich in all things!” - Joseph Prince, ‘Rich Through Jesus’ Poverty’, in id., Destined To Reign Devotional: Daily reflections for effortless success, wholeness and victorious living (Singapore, 22 Media Pte. Ltd., 2008), p. 357.
Look through the whole devotional yourself, JP is NOT talking about spiritual wealth, it is clearly MATERIAL WEALTH and MATERIAL PROSPERITY.
Did your Lord Jesus, at the garden in Gethsemane, agonized and shuddered at accepting the cup the Father has asked Him to so that Jesus "paid the price for your prosperity"? This is a FALSE gospel presentation and a false Christ is being presented.
Anyone who truly love the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Savior will reject this sad perversion of the Gospel.
The Gospel is the power unto salvation to be preached for the conversion of sinful souls of men and women to repent and turn to Jesus Christ for their only hope for eternity to be with their Creator, do NOT pervert it !
Shalom
--------------------
Lip Kee replied:
TW,
Am I a false believer? Am I perverting the gospel?
I believe that because I have Jesus in my life, I have the power to get wealth. (Deuteronomy 8:18). I believe and I boldly proclaim that "Jesus was made poor at the cross for my sake so that through His poverty, I am made rich in ALL THINGS" - not merely spiritual or material, but ALL things - both spiritual and material.
Now, do you therefore conclude that I am a lover and servant of money? Do you therefore consider me as a lesser (or even false) believer? Do you therefore see me as someone who perverts the gospel?
Or would you reserve your comments about me until you get to know me better as a person, until you see how I relate to people and conduct my daily affairs, until you see the fruit (or lack of fruit) in my life?
Did Jesus speak of just spiritual blessings only or BOTH spiritual and material blessings?
The Jesus I know did not MERELY speak about spiritual blessings only. The Jesus I know taught me to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and ALL THESE THINGS (material blessings) will be added upon me.
Similarly, NCC does not merely teaches about spiritual blessings only. NCC teaches the congregation to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and and ALL THESE THINGS (material blessings) will be added upon them.
As I've written previously, two different persons may observe the same facts about NCC and read the same words written by Pastor Prince, but arrive at totally different conclusions about the church.
After having served with the pastors, leaders and other members in the church for more than 5 years, my personal conclusion is "NCC is CHRIST-focused: always preaching about CHRIST'S blessing of health, CHRIST'S blessing of wealth, CHRIST'S blessings - it's all about CHRIST, CHRIST, CHRIST."
Note: The original discussion took place in a friend's blog:
here
You know JP and NCC clearly teaches this false "Gospel" below:
"Accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour will not only save you from sin and hell, but also give to you health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more." http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/we_believe/cross.htm
-------------------
Lip Kee replied:
Why would proclaiming that "Accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour will not only save you from sin and hell, but also give to you health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more" be tantamount to preaching a false "Gospel"?
Do we see Christ as everything we need?
Would you agree that Jesus Christ is:
- the Lord who is able and willing to heal;
- the joy of all the Earth;
- the Prince of Peace,
- God's perfect love personified;
- our hope of glory
- the beloved in whom we are accepted;
- the Lord who enables us to be able and willing to give (in terms of material possessions, time, efforts, love) generously to help others;
- the source of all good things
The way I see it, receiving Jesus as my Lord and Savior means that I also receive Him as my Lord of ALL, my Savior to whom I turn to for any and every kind of challenges I face in life.
When I say that take Jesus as my EVERYTHING, I mean just that: EVERYTHING - including health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the ability to be generous with others (with our time, our energy, our material possessions), and all good things I can ever ask or think.
So, in that sense, I really don't see what's wrong with the statement.
Would you like to point out which portion(s) of the statement you find problematic or false?
--------------------------
TW wrote:
LipKee,
When anyone declares a "gospel" inviting one come to Jesus to get "favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more.", one declares a false gospel and a false christ.
COVETOUSNESS is IDOLATRY ! Colossians 3:5
"It's idolatry because the contentment that the heart should be getting from God it starts to get from something else.So covetousness is desiring something so much that you lose your contentment in God. Or: losing your contentment in God so that you start to seek it elsewhere. Covetousness is a heart divided between two gods. So Paul calls it idolatry. "
God is to be magnified by the offensive and "foolishness" nature of true Gospel of Jesus Christ. God is to be desired above ALL, Christ is to be desired above ALL. God chose the foolish Gospel of a despised and suffering Christ. God sovereignly by grace draws and calls a sinner to come to Christ by allowing the sinner to see the beauty of the Cross of Christ. "For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men." 1Cor 1:18, 20.
When one comes to Jesus Christ, one comes to Jesus Christ ALONE. When one comes to seek $$$, one come to a false Christ or an "idolatry" offering the prospect of $$$.
This "gospel" from JP and NCC is the sad perversion of true Gospel of Jesus Christ. The false "gospel" from JP and NCC robbed Christ of His due glory. "Accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour will not only save you from sin and hell, but also give to you health, joy, peace, love, hope, unconditional acceptance, favour, the power to get wealth, all good things you can think of and more." http://www.newcreation.org.sg/aboutus/we_believe/cross.htm
-----------------------------
Lip Kee replied:
TW,
We all go through different stages in our walk with God, don't we?
A journey - from being self-occupied to being Christ-occupied
I don't know about you, but I did not start out my faith walk with Jesus because I had a pure heart that appreciated Him and Him alone, without any trace of selfishness. No. I started my walk with God like a typical self-centered child, who thought only about what I needed and wanted. I wanted to be saved. I wanted to enjoy heaven. I wanted God to hear and answer my prayers. It was all about ME AND MY BLESSINGS.
As I matured more in the Lord, I began to think more about how I can be a blessing to others. I started to find ways to serve and to give to people - first just within the church community, and eventually beyond the church to the society/ world at large. It became more about OTHERS AND HOW I COULD BE A BLESSING TO THEM.
After coming to NCC (in late 2002)and sitting under the ministry of Pastor Prince, I began to see more and more of how beautiful Jesus is in and of Himself, and I started to really appreciate how truly amazing His grace is. As I learned more and more about the goodness and generosity of my Savior and Lord - Who not only blesses me but also allow me the privilege of being a blessings to others, my focus started to be more and more on Him alone. More and more, it is about JESUS AND ONLY JESUS.
From being purely self-occupied, to being more others-occupied, to being more and more Christ- occupied, it has been a journey for me.
I don't claim speak for every believer, but at least for myself, and for many believers that I know personally in NCC, our faith walks are a journey we are taking, and along this journey of faith, NCC has played and is playing an important role in helping us becoming less self-occupied, less others-occupied, but more Christ occupied. :)
Revisiting the definition of wealth and prosperity
I would really want to encourage you to see "wealth" and "prosperity" not just in terms of money and material possessions. If you find those two words offensive, may I suggest we use the phrase "more than enough for ourselves that we may give generously to others". How about that? :)
I don't have a million dollars in my bank accounts. But I believe I have more than enough to give to others. And because I believe so, I give generously.
If and when I find myself facing financial challenges (which I had, several times in my life), I continue to hold on to the truth that the Lord is my Shepherd and I shall not want. I continue to be generous in my giving because I truly believe that I have more than enough because Jesus Christ is my Shepherd.
(Note: I am not giving you mere theoretical arguments here. I am sharing my life and how I actually live it. If you so demand, I will gladly provide you with the evidences of my giving of money and time to churches and various charitable organizations over the years)
On the covetousness of man and the Solution
Man has his needs and desires. Every Man seeks to be satisfied. Every Man seeks to blessed with good things. Man, by his very nature, covets. How would you address this problem of Man's covetousness?
I suggest the solution is to point man to Christ. Because in Christ, every need and desire of Man is fully met. I believe what Man really covets is the Presence of Christ.
And honestly, I don't see anything wrong with me coveting the Presence of Christ, do you?
-------------------
TW wrote:
Hi LipKee,
I appreciate your attempt to share your experiences, I do not intend to cast aspersion on your experiences. The issue is at hand is the perversion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The sad perversion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as typified by the teaching from JP's book below, how can any Christian who truly believe and love the Gospel of Jesus Christ not feel grieve and rightly conclude that "NCC as MAN-focused: always preaching about MY blessing of health, MY blessing of wealth, My blessings - it's all about ME, ME, ME." ??
"My friend, the moment you are born again, you have Jesus in your life. And when you have Him in your life, get ready to prosper for gold will come to you! But don’t look for the gold, look to Jesus - He is the power to get wealth. (Deuteronomy 8:18) The presence of the Son of the living God in your life attracts prosperity. Because of His grace toward us, Jesus though He was rich, was made poor at the cross for your sake so that “you through His poverty might become rich.
Beloved, when you have Jesus in your life and when you know that He has paid the price for your prosperity, you can boldly declare, “Jesus was made poor at the cross for my sake so that through His poverty, I am made rich in all things!” - Joseph Prince, ‘Rich Through Jesus’ Poverty’, in id., Destined To Reign Devotional: Daily reflections for effortless success, wholeness and victorious living (Singapore, 22 Media Pte. Ltd., 2008), p. 357.
Look through the whole devotional yourself, JP is NOT talking about spiritual wealth, it is clearly MATERIAL WEALTH and MATERIAL PROSPERITY.
Did your Lord Jesus, at the garden in Gethsemane, agonized and shuddered at accepting the cup the Father has asked Him to so that Jesus "paid the price for your prosperity"? This is a FALSE gospel presentation and a false Christ is being presented.
Anyone who truly love the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Savior will reject this sad perversion of the Gospel.
The Gospel is the power unto salvation to be preached for the conversion of sinful souls of men and women to repent and turn to Jesus Christ for their only hope for eternity to be with their Creator, do NOT pervert it !
Shalom
--------------------
Lip Kee replied:
TW,
Am I a false believer? Am I perverting the gospel?
I believe that because I have Jesus in my life, I have the power to get wealth. (Deuteronomy 8:18). I believe and I boldly proclaim that "Jesus was made poor at the cross for my sake so that through His poverty, I am made rich in ALL THINGS" - not merely spiritual or material, but ALL things - both spiritual and material.
Now, do you therefore conclude that I am a lover and servant of money? Do you therefore consider me as a lesser (or even false) believer? Do you therefore see me as someone who perverts the gospel?
Or would you reserve your comments about me until you get to know me better as a person, until you see how I relate to people and conduct my daily affairs, until you see the fruit (or lack of fruit) in my life?
Did Jesus speak of just spiritual blessings only or BOTH spiritual and material blessings?
The Jesus I know did not MERELY speak about spiritual blessings only. The Jesus I know taught me to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and ALL THESE THINGS (material blessings) will be added upon me.
Similarly, NCC does not merely teaches about spiritual blessings only. NCC teaches the congregation to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and and ALL THESE THINGS (material blessings) will be added upon them.
As I've written previously, two different persons may observe the same facts about NCC and read the same words written by Pastor Prince, but arrive at totally different conclusions about the church.
After having served with the pastors, leaders and other members in the church for more than 5 years, my personal conclusion is "NCC is CHRIST-focused: always preaching about CHRIST'S blessing of health, CHRIST'S blessing of wealth, CHRIST'S blessings - it's all about CHRIST, CHRIST, CHRIST."
Note: The original discussion took place in a friend's blog:
here
A church that does not know what a church is - a discussion
SZ wrote:
Those who support NCC's project try to justify by invoking practical and logistic reason. But I think the root problem is not they don't know how to manage their money, but they don't know what is a church and the gospel.
They think the gospel is all about God's grace saving our souls from sin and death. Period. To them, a church is just a place for people to gather, sing praise and worship songs, pray, and listen to Joseph Prince, so that our souls can be saved. This is of course nonsense.
...the church has no concern over theological education or harbor hope for the future of the wider Christian community in the long run. Their only trusted teacher is their senior pastor. And they expect Rapture to happen anytime soon. And when that happened, the faithfuls will zap to heaven leaving their clothes behind. So no point thinking too far ahead. What's important is to bring more people to Joseph Prince. To be baptized by him. That's their Great Commission.
-----------------
Lip Kee replied:
Dear SZ,
I don't know if you were just exaggerating to bring forth your points, or if you really meant what you wrote. Do you honestly think that ALL or the majority of the people who attend NCC really have no idea what a church is, and that they do not know what the gospel is?
Understanding of what the gospel is
You wrote: "They think the gospel is all about God's grace saving our souls from sin and death. Period."
I, for one, and I personally know of many others in NCC who do not subscribe to such a simplistic definition of the gospel - certainly not the way you phrased it. We (meaning those NCC members I personally know of and myself - I don't claim to represent the entire church) believe the gospel to be more than just having our souls saved from sin and death. The good news is MUCH MORE.
Afterall, the good news is ALL about Jesus Christ and His Finished Work on the Cross. So, in a sense, to the extent we could understand the limitlessness of the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ and His Finished Work on the cross, to that extent we could talk about the richness of the content of the gospel.
Understanding of what the church is
You wrote: "To them, a church is just a place for people to gather, sing praise and worship songs, pray, and listen to Joseph Prince, so that our souls can be saved. This is of course nonsense."
I would be the first to agree with you totally that such definition of the church is utter nonsense. Honestly, I don't personally know of a single person in NCC who subscribes to such a definition for a church, do you? If such a person really do exists in NCC, I am sure the leaders in the church would like to meet up with and counsel him/her. Our pastors have taught us over and over again that it is the people who make up the church, not any building. And the church gathers to worship, to commune with, to hear and to see our Lord Jesus Christ, not any mere man.
Having only one trusted teacher?
You wrote: "Their only trusted teacher is their senior pastor."
Honestly, I am curious to find out why, and how did you arrive at such a conclusion. I personally do not regard my senior pastor as my only trusted teacher. And among the people I personally know of in NCC, many of them read the books of and listen to sermons by other pastors and preachers. And some have attended or are attending Bible schools. I may be wrong, but I seriously doubt I could find a single person among them who regards Pastor Prince as the ONLY trusted teacher.
Understanding of the Great Commission
You wrote: "And they expect Rapture to happen anytime soon. And when that happened, the faithfuls will zap to heaven leaving their clothes behind. So no point thinking too far ahead. What's important is to bring more people to Joseph Prince. To be baptized by him. That's their Great Commission."
Again, I do not know how you came to making such a statement. I believe I speak for many, if not all of my personal friends and myself (again, I don't claim to represent everyone in NCC, only myself and the ones I personally know of) that we certainly do not live our lives the way you've described. We think and plan ahead. We have our own minds and lead our own full lives beyond that of the church community. And we certainly do not think the Great Commission is about bringing people to Pastor Prince and getting them baptized by him.
The church is not about a mere pastor, but all about the Great Savior
I would like to clarify here, on behalf of the NCC people that I know of personally and myself, that the focus of the Great Commission for us is not about a mere pastor, but the GREAT SAVIOR - our Lord Jesus Christ.
If you would care to hear me out, may I offer you a few gentle words of advice? Be more careful and precise in the way you write, especially when you are writing about other people.
You have a good mind. You write well. Let your gifts be a blessing to build people up.
----------
SZ wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for your comment and clarification, especially for your sharing of what you and your community view on NCC. As the title of the post is "Guessing...", the post is essential a guess based on the info that I have access to. It is not a ph.D dissertation.
Yet after reading your comment, I still think that I didn't guess wrongly or at least not entirely missed the point. For eg. you wrote that "good news is ALL about Jesus Christ and His Finished Work on the Cross." But what does this really mean?
And you mentioned that NCC's people know that the church is God's community and not building. And you know what? When I wrote that I think NCC has no idea what is the church, it didn't occur in my mind that NCC is so pathetic to the extent that they think church is building. Actually I have higher regards on NCC than the impression you got or mistakenly got. Pls don't get the impression that I'm an anti-NCC whose self-declared life purpose is to condemn my fellow Bro & Sis who are worshiping our same Lord there.
Hence when I say NCC don't know what is the church, it means something more nuanced.
Again, thanks for your time to share here.
---------------
Lip Kee replied:
Hi SZ,
Just to clarify, not to prove who is right and who is wrong
You wrote: "Yet after reading your comment, I still think that I didn't guess wrongly or at least not entirely missed the point."
My comment:
Please don't misunderstand me. :) My intention is not to prove who's views are right or who's are wrong. I am NOT interested in that.
I just wanted:
(1) to find out how you arrived at your statements/ guesses about NCC, and if they were arrived at based on your actual observations of and encounters with NCC people; and
(2) to present to you my personal observations of and encounters with a number of NCC people, and the different conclusions that I arrived at based on those limited observations and encounters.
Maybe your statements/ guesses about NCC were based on your observations of and your encounters with a very different set of NCC people than those whom I've met. Maybe you arrived at those conclusions of yours because of certain unique experiences you had in NCC.
Regardless, I am in no position to reject or deny your statements/ guesses.
So, there is no question about who's right and who's wrong, just an attempt to clarify why we hold such different views of NCC and how we arrived at our views.
So, you cool with that? :)
-------------
SZ wrote:
Ya, absolutely cool with that.
My guess is based on the observation of NCC's teachings, its' activities, and reading its members' testimonies about their own experiences and opinions with the church and how they respond to outsiders' view on the church.
-----------
Lip Kee replied:
SZ,
OK. Thanks for clarifying the basis of your guess. :)
Advice to be more careful and precise in writing about others
I would just like to reiterate my advice to you: Do consider being more careful and precise in the way you write, especially when you are writing about other people.
You may not mean it, but your readers may get the impression that you are putting down the NCC people and treating them as a bunch of shallow and ignorant believers.
Perhaps you may want to consider using qualifying statements like "some of the NCC people that I've come across" instead of "they". That way, the statements you've written will sound more reasonable and acceptable, don't you think so?
Try to replace the word "they" with the phrase "some of the NCC people that I've come across" in the statements you have made (see below), and you should see where I am coming from:
"They think the gospel is all about God's grace saving our souls from sin and death. Period."
"To them, a church is just a place for people to gather, sing praise and worship songs, pray, and listen to Joseph Prince, so that our souls can be saved. This is of course nonsense."
"Their only trusted teacher is their senior pastor."
"And they expect Rapture to happen anytime soon. And when that happened, the faithfuls will zap to heaven leaving their clothes behind. So no point thinking too far ahead. What's important is to bring more people to Joseph Prince. To be baptized by him. That's their Great Commission."
---------------
SZ wrote:
Hi Lip Kee,
U r welcome. And thank you for reminding and your advise. Appreciate them :)
On the other hand, I dont see the need to change the "they" to "some of them" as you suggested. Simply because, I do think that my post is not wrong.
And since as you have previously indicated that your intention is not to prove who's view is right or wrong, then by accepting your proposal without good reasons, we would have shifted into the "right & wrong" field which you are not interested in.
So if it's not about right and wrong, then nothing need to be changed because nothing need to be righted. Does that make sense to you? :)
-------------------
Lip Kee replied:
SZ,
A scenario to consider
Imagine a female person writing about men and making generalized and sweeping statements such as the one that follows:
"ALL men are jerks. They are ill-mannered, boring, shallow, and crude. They are not capable of acting responsibly. They think only about sex all the time. They have absolutely no idea what true love is. They are a totally self centered species. They are unable to care for others at all. They don't know how to live life meaningfully. They are utterly hopeless. Period."
Perhaps because of the types of men she has encountered and observed in her life, the writer honestly believe every word she has written above about those men (or even ALL men).
But as a man, how would you react to what she has written? Would you just shrug your shoulders, raise your eyebrows and smile? Or would you regard her as well-informed, objective, analytical, accurate, and insightful writer?
If you believe that this female writer has a good mind, that she has real substance, and that she has valuable things she could share that will benefit many of her readers, what advice would you give to her?
Notice that I am not asking you to judge how right or wrong her statement about men is. I am asking you to think of ways to help her reach out more effectively to her readers.
Similarly, I am not interested in proving your statements about NCC right or wrong. I am not interest in doing that at all.
I am just suggesting that you consider adopting a different approach/tone when you write about NCC. I made the suggestion because I believe it may help you connect more with your readers, make them more receptive to your writings, so that instead of having a knee-jerk reaction, they would seriously reflect upon the points you've made.
Just ignore my advice if you don't think it is useful or helpful to you. This is you blog after all, so you get to decide what and how you write. I can totally respect that. :)
Stay blessed and be a blessing.
Note: The original discussion took place in SZ's blog :
http://szezeng.blogspot.com/2009/03/guessing-over-new-creation-churchs.html
Those who support NCC's project try to justify by invoking practical and logistic reason. But I think the root problem is not they don't know how to manage their money, but they don't know what is a church and the gospel.
They think the gospel is all about God's grace saving our souls from sin and death. Period. To them, a church is just a place for people to gather, sing praise and worship songs, pray, and listen to Joseph Prince, so that our souls can be saved. This is of course nonsense.
...the church has no concern over theological education or harbor hope for the future of the wider Christian community in the long run. Their only trusted teacher is their senior pastor. And they expect Rapture to happen anytime soon. And when that happened, the faithfuls will zap to heaven leaving their clothes behind. So no point thinking too far ahead. What's important is to bring more people to Joseph Prince. To be baptized by him. That's their Great Commission.
-----------------
Lip Kee replied:
Dear SZ,
I don't know if you were just exaggerating to bring forth your points, or if you really meant what you wrote. Do you honestly think that ALL or the majority of the people who attend NCC really have no idea what a church is, and that they do not know what the gospel is?
Understanding of what the gospel is
You wrote: "They think the gospel is all about God's grace saving our souls from sin and death. Period."
I, for one, and I personally know of many others in NCC who do not subscribe to such a simplistic definition of the gospel - certainly not the way you phrased it. We (meaning those NCC members I personally know of and myself - I don't claim to represent the entire church) believe the gospel to be more than just having our souls saved from sin and death. The good news is MUCH MORE.
Afterall, the good news is ALL about Jesus Christ and His Finished Work on the Cross. So, in a sense, to the extent we could understand the limitlessness of the Person of our Lord Jesus Christ and His Finished Work on the cross, to that extent we could talk about the richness of the content of the gospel.
Understanding of what the church is
You wrote: "To them, a church is just a place for people to gather, sing praise and worship songs, pray, and listen to Joseph Prince, so that our souls can be saved. This is of course nonsense."
I would be the first to agree with you totally that such definition of the church is utter nonsense. Honestly, I don't personally know of a single person in NCC who subscribes to such a definition for a church, do you? If such a person really do exists in NCC, I am sure the leaders in the church would like to meet up with and counsel him/her. Our pastors have taught us over and over again that it is the people who make up the church, not any building. And the church gathers to worship, to commune with, to hear and to see our Lord Jesus Christ, not any mere man.
Having only one trusted teacher?
You wrote: "Their only trusted teacher is their senior pastor."
Honestly, I am curious to find out why, and how did you arrive at such a conclusion. I personally do not regard my senior pastor as my only trusted teacher. And among the people I personally know of in NCC, many of them read the books of and listen to sermons by other pastors and preachers. And some have attended or are attending Bible schools. I may be wrong, but I seriously doubt I could find a single person among them who regards Pastor Prince as the ONLY trusted teacher.
Understanding of the Great Commission
You wrote: "And they expect Rapture to happen anytime soon. And when that happened, the faithfuls will zap to heaven leaving their clothes behind. So no point thinking too far ahead. What's important is to bring more people to Joseph Prince. To be baptized by him. That's their Great Commission."
Again, I do not know how you came to making such a statement. I believe I speak for many, if not all of my personal friends and myself (again, I don't claim to represent everyone in NCC, only myself and the ones I personally know of) that we certainly do not live our lives the way you've described. We think and plan ahead. We have our own minds and lead our own full lives beyond that of the church community. And we certainly do not think the Great Commission is about bringing people to Pastor Prince and getting them baptized by him.
The church is not about a mere pastor, but all about the Great Savior
I would like to clarify here, on behalf of the NCC people that I know of personally and myself, that the focus of the Great Commission for us is not about a mere pastor, but the GREAT SAVIOR - our Lord Jesus Christ.
If you would care to hear me out, may I offer you a few gentle words of advice? Be more careful and precise in the way you write, especially when you are writing about other people.
You have a good mind. You write well. Let your gifts be a blessing to build people up.
----------
SZ wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for your comment and clarification, especially for your sharing of what you and your community view on NCC. As the title of the post is "Guessing...", the post is essential a guess based on the info that I have access to. It is not a ph.D dissertation.
Yet after reading your comment, I still think that I didn't guess wrongly or at least not entirely missed the point. For eg. you wrote that "good news is ALL about Jesus Christ and His Finished Work on the Cross." But what does this really mean?
And you mentioned that NCC's people know that the church is God's community and not building. And you know what? When I wrote that I think NCC has no idea what is the church, it didn't occur in my mind that NCC is so pathetic to the extent that they think church is building. Actually I have higher regards on NCC than the impression you got or mistakenly got. Pls don't get the impression that I'm an anti-NCC whose self-declared life purpose is to condemn my fellow Bro & Sis who are worshiping our same Lord there.
Hence when I say NCC don't know what is the church, it means something more nuanced.
Again, thanks for your time to share here.
---------------
Lip Kee replied:
Hi SZ,
Just to clarify, not to prove who is right and who is wrong
You wrote: "Yet after reading your comment, I still think that I didn't guess wrongly or at least not entirely missed the point."
My comment:
Please don't misunderstand me. :) My intention is not to prove who's views are right or who's are wrong. I am NOT interested in that.
I just wanted:
(1) to find out how you arrived at your statements/ guesses about NCC, and if they were arrived at based on your actual observations of and encounters with NCC people; and
(2) to present to you my personal observations of and encounters with a number of NCC people, and the different conclusions that I arrived at based on those limited observations and encounters.
Maybe your statements/ guesses about NCC were based on your observations of and your encounters with a very different set of NCC people than those whom I've met. Maybe you arrived at those conclusions of yours because of certain unique experiences you had in NCC.
Regardless, I am in no position to reject or deny your statements/ guesses.
So, there is no question about who's right and who's wrong, just an attempt to clarify why we hold such different views of NCC and how we arrived at our views.
So, you cool with that? :)
-------------
SZ wrote:
Ya, absolutely cool with that.
My guess is based on the observation of NCC's teachings, its' activities, and reading its members' testimonies about their own experiences and opinions with the church and how they respond to outsiders' view on the church.
-----------
Lip Kee replied:
SZ,
OK. Thanks for clarifying the basis of your guess. :)
Advice to be more careful and precise in writing about others
I would just like to reiterate my advice to you: Do consider being more careful and precise in the way you write, especially when you are writing about other people.
You may not mean it, but your readers may get the impression that you are putting down the NCC people and treating them as a bunch of shallow and ignorant believers.
Perhaps you may want to consider using qualifying statements like "some of the NCC people that I've come across" instead of "they". That way, the statements you've written will sound more reasonable and acceptable, don't you think so?
Try to replace the word "they" with the phrase "some of the NCC people that I've come across" in the statements you have made (see below), and you should see where I am coming from:
"They think the gospel is all about God's grace saving our souls from sin and death. Period."
"To them, a church is just a place for people to gather, sing praise and worship songs, pray, and listen to Joseph Prince, so that our souls can be saved. This is of course nonsense."
"Their only trusted teacher is their senior pastor."
"And they expect Rapture to happen anytime soon. And when that happened, the faithfuls will zap to heaven leaving their clothes behind. So no point thinking too far ahead. What's important is to bring more people to Joseph Prince. To be baptized by him. That's their Great Commission."
---------------
SZ wrote:
Hi Lip Kee,
U r welcome. And thank you for reminding and your advise. Appreciate them :)
On the other hand, I dont see the need to change the "they" to "some of them" as you suggested. Simply because, I do think that my post is not wrong.
And since as you have previously indicated that your intention is not to prove who's view is right or wrong, then by accepting your proposal without good reasons, we would have shifted into the "right & wrong" field which you are not interested in.
So if it's not about right and wrong, then nothing need to be changed because nothing need to be righted. Does that make sense to you? :)
-------------------
Lip Kee replied:
SZ,
A scenario to consider
Imagine a female person writing about men and making generalized and sweeping statements such as the one that follows:
"ALL men are jerks. They are ill-mannered, boring, shallow, and crude. They are not capable of acting responsibly. They think only about sex all the time. They have absolutely no idea what true love is. They are a totally self centered species. They are unable to care for others at all. They don't know how to live life meaningfully. They are utterly hopeless. Period."
Perhaps because of the types of men she has encountered and observed in her life, the writer honestly believe every word she has written above about those men (or even ALL men).
But as a man, how would you react to what she has written? Would you just shrug your shoulders, raise your eyebrows and smile? Or would you regard her as well-informed, objective, analytical, accurate, and insightful writer?
If you believe that this female writer has a good mind, that she has real substance, and that she has valuable things she could share that will benefit many of her readers, what advice would you give to her?
Notice that I am not asking you to judge how right or wrong her statement about men is. I am asking you to think of ways to help her reach out more effectively to her readers.
Similarly, I am not interested in proving your statements about NCC right or wrong. I am not interest in doing that at all.
I am just suggesting that you consider adopting a different approach/tone when you write about NCC. I made the suggestion because I believe it may help you connect more with your readers, make them more receptive to your writings, so that instead of having a knee-jerk reaction, they would seriously reflect upon the points you've made.
Just ignore my advice if you don't think it is useful or helpful to you. This is you blog after all, so you get to decide what and how you write. I can totally respect that. :)
Stay blessed and be a blessing.
Note: The original discussion took place in SZ's blog :
http://szezeng.blogspot.com/2009/03/guessing-over-new-creation-churchs.html
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
News report on NCC's Miracle Seed Sunday - My Paper: Mar 10, 2009
News @ AsiaOne
$19 million in less than 24 hours
The congregation at New Creation Church raised a whopping $19 million for the construction of its new premises at Buona Vista. -myp
Tue, Mar 10, 2009
my paper
THE congregation at New Creation Church raised a whopping $19 million for the construction of its new premises at Buona Vista - in less than 24 hours.
In a show of support, a record number of 22,000 people turned up for services at the Rock Auditorium at Suntec City Mall three weeks ago.
The donations were collected over four services on Feb 15.
In comparison, a month-long charity drive by NTUC Income, Project Love, raised about $375,000.
Following the success of its fund-raiser, the New Creation Church announced the amount it raised to its members on Feb 22. However, when contacted, the church declined to comment.
New Creation Church-goer Angelique Lee, 26, a full-time student, said her donation was a form of thanksgiving and appreciation "for all that God has blessed me with".
'Attending church has helped to transform my life and make me a better person over time,' she explained.
Graduate student Huang Wei Hsuan, 26, who is not a member of the church, felt that part of the funds could be used to "help those who are really in need, instead of being fully used to construct a new building".
'Is it really a good idea to build a new building now? Should the church members be advised to keep more for rainy days?' he asked. But many others who are not from the church were heartened by the congregation's generosity.
'I feel it's incredible that such kindness, empathy and generosity can be shown in such bad economic times,' said Mr Shawn Chin, 24, a civil servant.
joyfang@sph.com.sg
Straits Times report on NCC's Miracle Seed Sunday (2009)
STRAITS TIMES - 11 March 2009
CHURCH COLLECTS $19m IN ONE DAY FOR LIFESTYLE HUB
By Theresa Tan & Melissa Sim
MEMBERS of the New Creation Church and their friends donated an average of $864 each one Sunday last month, netting the church a whopping $19 million for its upcoming multimillion-dollar lifestyle hub in Buona Vista.
The sum is believed to be the largest ever collected in Singapore in one single day and comes at a time when charities say donations are dipping, as the recession worsens and people are keeping their hands firmly in their pockets.
This, however, is not the first time the New Creation Church, an independent church led by Senior Pastor Joseph Prince, has collected such a staggering sum in one day. One Sunday in April last year, the church collected about $18 million during its first 'Miracle Seed Sunday'.
The church declined to be interviewed, saying its affairs were 'a personal expression of worship'.
But The Straits Times understands that 'Miracle Seed Sunday' is a day when the church's members 'sow a seed, expecting miracles'.
Mr Prince declared during his sermons early last month that Feb 15 would be a 'Miracle Seed Sunday'.
A record 22,000 people, including members and their friends, showed up on Feb15 for the church services and pledged $19 million. The proceeds are to go to the church's new cultural and entertainment complex being developed by its business arm, Rock Productions.
Last September, Rock Productions told The Straits Times it had raised about a third of the $500 million it needed to build the complex. It is partnering property giant CapitaLand to build the close to $1 billion project, envisioned as a 'futuristic complex with restaurants, shops and a 5,000-seat theatre'.
CapitaLand will own and manage the complex's retail and entertainment zone. Rock Productions will own and manage the civic and cultural zone, which will house the 5,000-seat theatre to be used for the New Creation Church's Sunday services.
Church members interviewed said they were happy to donate to the new complex. Bank executive Marcus Wong, 28, said: 'It's not compulsory. Whoever has the heart and wants to give can come forward to give. The building is for God, so we see it as an offering.'
When asked whether she thought the money should go to helping the poor instead of constructing a building, another church member, a businesswoman who declined to be named, replied: 'I believe with the new building, we are giving to the kingdom of God, and God will be able to bless more people.'
The New Creation Church is one of the fastest- growing churches in Singapore. It was founded here in 1984 by a group of young Christians and has grown from 25 believers to more than 18,000 members today. It had an income of $55.4 million during its last financial year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
