I think that if what a pastor makes and is open to all then
it should be OK to make a good wages.
The problem is are the wages known? This includes all (Weddings, Funrals and etc. Gifts) And it is approved by the Church body. If $100,000 is the adverage wages of most workers, then yes. How he manages his money, Big Houses, nice cars is his management of money. I'm am sure he would be giving 10%+ to the Lord.

I see absolutely NO REASON to assume that pastors, in general, are sworn to poverty (outside of the Roman Catholic heirarchy that has its own rules).
The usual arrangement (in my personl experience) is that housing is provided and certain expenses (varying with the individual parish) are reimbursed. Total compensation should reflect that of the average income of his parishioners at the very minimum, and members should realize that their spiritual health is in his hands! If you don't trust him, get another pastor! If you do, pay him his due.

I love seeing Pastor's who live a "good" life. The most blessed Pastors I know are those that have always given above and beyond. They understood from their early years the principles of returning 10% to God and then giving an offering above that. They practiced this when they had very little income trusting that the Lord would provide. Giving takes faith. Faith is rewarded in blessings.

It is a challenging subject with no easy answers. My personal opinion is that you take the average household income in the community and use it as the base-line. I don't think it is good for a pastor to become rich but he has to be able to provide for his family and he has the same issues everyone else has when it comes to the costs of living (i.e. food, housing, schooling, etc.).

I don't think it sends a good message to the community when a member of the clergy has an expensive car and home. I deal with the same thing in my company. I'm a business owner and I choose to drive a modest vehicle because people in the company watch what I do. As Christians we should care about image because non-Christians watch everything we say or do.

One last point, the nicer your stuff the more you worry about hanging on to it. It puts a certain pressure on people and causes them to make poor choices at times. Pastors certainly don't need to live in poverty but anything they can do to create an image of humbleness, love, etc., the more chance they'll have in bringing others to Christ. And isn't that why we are here?!

Deut 25:4, 1 Co 9:1-14, 1 Ti 3, 5:18, Jer 23, Acts 6:1-4
The pay of the pastor should not be such that it is an overt burdon of the Church. However, the pastor should not be paid so little that he must find other employment to be able to survive. The pastor should not create a bill load that he cannot be available to the call of God.
What the pastor of any given Church is between the pastor and the eldership of the Church. It should be available to the congregation of that Church. Besides those, it is of no one's business how much (or little) a pastor is paid by a congregation.

We shouldn't base our opinion's on what society or the majority believes. The majority and society can be wrong! We know there were only 7 people who got onto the ark, so, the majority must have been wrong. A lot of people crucified Christ, but the majority were wrong. Lot and his family survived Sodom but the majority stayed behind and were destroyed. However, when we ask questions such as "should a Pastor make a lot of money and have nice things?" we should always turn to the Book of Life and Truth, God's Word to get the answers. I Timothy 5:17-18 says, "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward." Yes, they should have nice things and money based on their labor. If a Pastor is always pinching pennies and worrying about his bills and feeding his family etc., how can he be efficient and unbound enough to really concentrate on the spiritual needs of the church.

As another poster said, I see no reason that a Pastor needs to be kept poor so he can be humble. The Pastor is the spiritual leader for that congregation, and needs to be able to minister effectively, without being unduly burdened by the cares of this world.

If the church is organized so that the members and/or the elders are the decision makers, then what the Pastor is compensated should be known. Some churches are Pastor-led. In those churches, the over-seers are the ones who have the right to know what the Pastor is compensated.

A good yardstick would be to compare the Pastor's salary to the average salary of a business owner of similar size. If the church has 30 paid staff, what is the average compensation for a business with 30 employees? Further, you can use the church's income (donations) and compare it the the revenue of these companies, and get an even better idea of what the Pastor is worth.

There are many Pastors like Rick Warren or Robert Morris who live quite well, but take little or no salary from their churches. They have developed means of support that allow them to concentrate on ministry instead of money.

The final determination needs to be the results. Is the church living up to its Mission Statement? Is it effectively ministering to its members and having an impact on the community? If it is meeting those goals, why shouldn't the Pastor be compensated for his efforts?

It depends on what the pastor is. Is he lost or saved? Is he called to the office of pastor or did he call himself?
I've heard of revivals coming to town and the pastor himself was preaching the Scriptures in the power of the flesh; people in the congregation got saved even though he was lost. When the Holy Spirit got hold of the preacher, he had to humble himself before the people and confess his own sins to them.
If a pastor is lost, he may be more inclined to amass stuff and all that goes with it (IMHO). He may not.
Did God call him to the ofice of pastor (in the 5-fold ministry) or did he "think" he was called and God did not. If God didn't call him, then why is he in the pulpit? In that case, how much of what he preaches is inspired from heaven for that particular message? What kind of a lifestyle does he live (money, cars, things, etc)?
On the other hand, it sounds like people with little are jealous of the preacher who has a lot and they want him to share his wealth (which is Marxism. Take from those with abundance and give to them who have little).
You just cannot make a blanket statement over everyone in the pulpit. You have to take each person case by case and I think that's for God alone to judge, not us.

it depends whether his total salary comes from the collection plate on Sundays or if he was wise in his early years and has amassed a large amount of investments and gets a lot of $ each month through dividends. If we don't like that concept, we are telling God that we don't like the wisdom to amass a small fortune that God gave this man....

Did someone give him that Rolex on his wrist? Did someone will him that expensive house because the pastor was a blessing to his family? Did someone give him that fancy car because God blessed that business? (In other words, did he go out and buy all this stuff or did people give it to him?)......

If the pastor is not burdening the church to give, give, give, and if the church chooses to give him millions, then that is their choice. The problems comes when pastors manipulate their congregation to give to them, ie.. "Sow into my ministry, or my life and the Lord will bless you", there is nothing biblical to support that. When a pastor is extemely rich, their are three things I check to ensure his integrity,
1)Significant respect for people with money in their church and very little respect for people who dont have money.

2)Make it more important to give to them and not to people who really need it. and,

3)Large churches who place very little emphasis on missions, and helping the poor.

What is expensive? Should a painter make over 100,000 a year and drive an expensive car? A minority? Policeman? Teacher? You seem to have fallen into the liberal trap of questioning "rich" people. another example of class warfare. You of all the people think this is entertaining. What is your salary? Your car. What does your wife deserve? Your family? Leave the clergy alone. They have enough problems with every member as his boss. I fail to see this as a worthy topic for which you are being sponsered with "church people's" money. Not funny or entertaining

Is the pastor's "stuff" any different from your "stuff?" Is the question really, "does your pastor drive a fancy car," or is it "should any Christ follower drive a fancy car?"

Our pastor and anyone who comes on staff works one year without salary. None live in big homes or drive fancy or big cars...in fact the Senior Pastor drives a Jeep. None make big bucks...or want them. Their entire focus is on Jesus and making sure they are transparent serving the people in Glorifying God.

"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man... perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind... a mere contrivance [for the clergy] to filch wealth and power to themselves." Thomas Jefferson

I believe the Pastors Salary should be in keeping with the medium of the congregation.If the pastor have a mega congregation, and the medium income is $100,000, and the congretates live in big houses,and drive big cars, then I believe it's o k. On the other hand, if your congregation is 51 % senior citizens on fixed incomes, and 25 % are below poverty level, then I do not agree with it. The exception would be if the pastor had some independent form of income, and was not depending soly on the church for his income.

The point is that the clergy is largely corrupt. I used Thomas Jefferson as an expert witness because we all know he had many dealings with the clergy and concerning the clergy. His personal views on religion have nothing to do with it. However since you mentioned it, Thomas Jefferson’s intelligence also allowed him to QUESTION the existence of a higher power: “Question with boldness even the existence of a god.” – Thomas Jefferson. So that shoots down your religious dogma in the Book of Romans as far as Jefferson is concerned and over a billion other atheists as well. Quoting Romans or any other part of the Bible proves nothing. These are messages designed by men to enhance their own authority, not messages from God. These are ideas made up by men to intimidate other people into following them blindly. The passage in Romans is nothing more than one of the Bible’s many defenses against free inquiry and critical thinking.

Last year Barton's group, 'WallBuilders' was forced to issue a one-page document titled "Questionable Quotes," which is a list of 12 statements allegedly made by the Founding Fathers and other prominent historical figures, that are now considered to be false. For years David Barton has traveled the country, putting on programs about America's alleged "Christian heritage" in which he argued that the separation of church and state is a myth. Instead the United States was supposedly founded by Christians and was intended to be a fundamentalist-style "Christian nation." What was Barton's proof for these claims? The quotations he now admits are groundless! At least 9 of the 12 were included in Barton's 1989 book, The Myth of Separation, and appeared in the video version, "America's Godly Heritage." A federal court has ruled that Barton's materials are inappropriate for use in public schools. Steve cut and pasted an unverified claim made by D. James Kennedy about David Barton having an original document signed by Thomas Jefferson in which he mentioned Christ. Barton has long since been forced to admit this is one of three forgeries done by Barton himself. Just google ‘Forgeries by David Barton’ or ‘the lies of David Barton.’ Also Chris Rodda has a 9-part U-Tube video in which she details many of lies David Barton has told including lies he told about her. Never fear huh? It looks like all you Christians actually have on your side are forgeries and lies. Again.

The Christianity killing silver bullets have already been fired and hit their targets. 3 out of 4 Christian college students reject their faith before they graduate. Who is left to carry on the Christian system of dogmatic superstitions? No group in this nation is shrinking in numbers faster than professing Christians and people who claim no religious affiliation are the fastest growing group in the United States. What a thrill it is!
Modern day religious propaganda about the “Christian heritage of our nation” is just as erroneous and self-serving as Christian fundamentalist pronouncements about the birth of our universe. In both cases “men of God” completely ignore the actual evidence at hand and conjure up a fictitious tale. They then spread the myth, along with fabricated evidence, and repeat the myth so frequently that it is soon accepted uncritically by the citizenry.

The Christian heritage of our nation is not a hoax as long as we tell the whole story which the Christian revisionist version does not do. America was settled by Christians many of who came here to get away from the Church of England. In 1492 Columbus made the first contact with the “Indians.” For Native Americans, the world would never be the same. This date marked the beginning of the long road of persecution and genocide of Native Americans, our indigenous people by Bible believing Christians. By conservative estimates, the population of the United States prior to European contact was greater than 12 million. Four centuries later, the count was reduced by 95% to 237 thousand. In 1493, when Columbus returned to the Hispaniola, he quickly implemented policies of slavery and mass extermination of the Taino population of the Caribbean. Within three years, five million were dead. Las Casas, the primary historian of the Columbian era, writes of many accounts of the horrors that the Christian colonists inflicted upon the indigenous population: hanging them en mass, hacking their children into pieces to be used as dog feed, and other horrid cruelties. The works of Las Casas are often omitted from popular American history books and courses because Christian history writers tried to make Columbus and the first settlers into Christian heroes.

The Comedian Garrison Keillor was trying to be funny when he said: “My ancestors were Puritans from England. They arrived here in 1648 in hopes of finding greater restrictions than were permissible under English law at that time.” That joke is funny because it’s true. The Christians who settled America came here in hopes of setting up a Christian theocracy, one with greater restrictions than those of the Church of England. The opposite of what many people believe to be true. So when we discuss the Christian heritage of our nation facts of the religious persecution conducted by the colonial theocracies need to be discussed. We need to discuss Christian witch-hunts and the Salem witch trials. History students need to learn about the deadly riots in Boston over which version of the Bible to force on public school students. They need to learn the facts of the slaughter of indigenous natives by godly, Christian men, and the extermination of native cultures and the systemic abuse of native children by Christian missionaries. Let’s see how the Native Americans felt about being indoctrinated by Christians:
"They came with a Bible and their religion, stole our land, crushed our spirit, and now tell us we should be thankful to the Lord for being saved." - Pontiac (Obwanditag, c. 1718-1769).

"How can we have confidence in the white people? When Jesus Christ came upon the earth, you killed him, the son of your own God, you nailed him up!! You thought he was dead, but you were mistaken. And only after you thought you killed him did you worship him, and start killing those who would not worship him. What kind of people is this for us to trust?" - Tecumseh (1768-1813), Shawnee leader who united Native American tribes against the invader

Christian revisionists blur the distinction between the words “settled” and “founded” to promote their lies about the founding of our nation. Sure the people who settled America were Christians. Centuries later though, our nation our government was founded by mostly Deists and Freemasons. Being a Freemason was grounds for excommunication from both Protestant and Catholic churches. 52 of the 55 signers of the Declaration of Independence were Freemasons. Most Christians had no interest in the new government because they had fought on the side of the British. Some did though, and the Christian clergy of the Revolutionary period tried again and again to have references to Christianity inserted directly into the U.S. Constitution, but they were refused every time by the Founders. Yet Christian revisionists tell us Christians wrote the Constitution and intended for the United States to be a Christian theocracy. If that were true, we would be just another backwards, religious theocracy like Iran and Saudi Arabia, not a nation founded upon religious freedom. When have Christians EVER allowed religious freedom? The early American colonies certainly didn’t and they reflect what our country would be like if Christians had formed our government.

The inspiration for the Revolution came for Thomas Paine, a man who had written a stinging critique of Christianity in the Age of Reason. Christians hated Paine and rejected his ideas about a Revolution. Christian preachers preached that the king was the divinely appointed ruler and to fight the king was an act of defiance against God. In 1812 American Christians again supported the British because the United States had not become the Christian theocracy they had hoped for. There’s your Christian heritage for you. Not a pretty picture. This is why liars like David Barton feel compelled to write Christian atrocities out of the history books and replace them with lies, forgeries and phony evidence.

The Reverend Bird Wilson, who was just a few years removed from being a contemporary of the so-called founding fathers, said in a sermon that "the founders of our nation were nearly all Infidels, and that of the presidents who had thus far been elected [George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, and Andrew Jackson] _not a one had professed a belief in Christianity_" (Remsberg, p. 120)

Well, though these are important issues, I am not sure that the method is appropriate. During the broadcast an apparently famous minister had a luxurious car and even a helicopter perhaps. This person was referred by name, thereby, if they are of the Christian community, the proper complaint should be in the form of a rebuke, one on one; initially, Matt 18. Outside discussions should not occur to this open air until level 3, and it would still be questionable because of whether or not the audience is believing.

You could deny their true belief, but as a Christian we should not try to find loopholes to go around a specific process with a clear purpose, restoration.

When this is bypassed, it enters into the realm of gossip and busybody-ness.

Much of this bordered on covetousness, though the clear guidelines were good advice, things that I myself choose to follow. Mixing it with a clear violation destroys the purpose, and could build discontentment over; something that is not helpful to a young believer, especially in difficult economic times.

There is a lot of busybody activity going on, should we encourage more? Already there are many non-christian attacks.

Hey Steve, I respect your views, and was enjoying your site... until I stumbled upon this thread, which slightly changed my views. You sound like a belligerent idiot when you mock Boris instead of actually responding to his claims. Readers don't want to see your clever quips about his methods of writing, nor you discrediting him without any proof.

Your infantile slander reminds me of atheists/liberals' comments on Christian youtube videos. I know you are better than that. I would appreciate it if you would respond like an informed, logical adult.

Thank you.

1Co 9:8 What soldier ever serveth at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not the fruit thereof? Or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
1Co 9:8 Do I speak these things after the manner of men? or saith not the law also the same?
1Co 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn. Is it for the oxen that God careth,
1Co 9:10 or saith he it assuredly for our sake? Yea, for our sake it was written: because he that ploweth ought to plow in hope, and he that thresheth, to thresh in hope of partaking.
1Co 9:11 If we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?
1Co 9:12 If others partake of this right over you, do not we yet more? Nevertheless we did not use this right; but we bear all things, that we may cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ.
1Co 9:13 Know ye not that they that minister about sacred things eat of the things of the temple, and they that wait upon the altar have their portion with the altar?

It sounds to me like Paul has no problem with people who do Gods work well getting paid well for it. It also sounds like God in Deuteronomy 25:4 (the passage Paul is referencing) has no problem with a worker eating from what they work for. Or said differently, if someone works let them be paid for it. Numbers 18:21 says, "And unto the children of Levi, behold, I have given all the tithe in Israel for an inheritance, in return for their service which they serve, even the service of the tent of meeting." The Levites were the "pastors" of Israel.
Now how about some Math? Pastor Rick Warren, author of the Purpose Driven Life, pastors a church that routinely hosts approximately 20,000 people. Now if all of those people only made $10,000 a year and paid tithe of 10%, Pastor Warren's church would take in $200M a year. If only 10% of that was paid to pastor Warren he would make $20M a year. Now Rick Warren practices "reverse tithe" meaning he tithes 90% and lives on the remaining 10%. Meaning after tithe, Rick Warren would still make $2,000,000 dollars a year.

as Paul stated to the corinthians that everyone should purpose in their hearts what to give; and not to give out of reluctance and compulsion. The western society focuses so much on greed and self-adulation, that it has permeated into Christianity. The Lord YESHUA emphasized dying to self and loving our neighbors as ourselves, not fleecing flocks and enriching oneself down here on temporal earth. I pray The Lord comes before more souls fall to the wayside due to misrepresentation of the gospel.