Kalled2Preach said: I am in total agreement with you. But what if a church doesn't have enough people who are giving money to pay their bills? Wouldn't it be a good idea for that church to either 1) find a way to have the funds to pay their bills or 2) find a way to have more people coming and giving so that the bills could be paid? If option #2 were taken, would that be a bad thing for the church to do?
A question that comes to mind immediately, is how did such a financially-strapped church come into being in the first place? Did someone just decide to start a church on their own? Or was it started under the auspices of an already established church? If the former, by what authority was this group of people joined together as a church? If the latter, then it would be the responsibility of the Elders and Deacons who are overseeing this new work to supply the needs required.
Being raised Southern Baptists, I guess I don't have a complete Biblical understanding of what a deacon is supposed to do. In the churches I've been in (it's different in the one I'm serving in now), the deacons never did anything of the sort. They seemed to be DINOs (Deacons In Name Only). They helped administer the Lord's Supper and maybe teach some Sunday School, but that was about it.
