The missionaries that brough religion came with gift and other items for people to believe God.
I will like to ask simple question from my co nairalander, why is it that the current UNIVERSITY BUILD BY CHURCHES ARE NOT FOR THE POOR??

@poster
hello,well I think you need to consider the purpose and the motive. I'm not intending to criticize or encourage church schools by this post.I'm just considering the issue sincerely.Firstly,It needs to be emphasized that good education does not run solely on oxygen anywhere on earth.Funds are involved.We're on earth,not in heaven.The source of the funding of the school is what may differ.The mission schools you referred to were funded by generous people in europe.Even before the missionary sets off for his/her journey and during their stay here.The primary aim of the missionaries was to bring christianity here.hospitals,schools etc were some of the encouragements used and also for community development.Churches today also have a aim of winning converts.today,building schools is not one of their methods of encouragement.They have other forms of bringing in converts. Now Jesus has not mandated the church to go and build schools but to go and preach the good news.building schools is a personal decision by the church(es).So if they want to,they can decide not to collect money or to collect money.So it's more about the motive.If they make it cheap,there will be people who will subsidize it,maybe members or 'partners'.If there's no subsidy,the student pays for the running of the school.It depends on the decision and the motive for building.Some churches use the schools to generate funds,sooo.Some have the vision of been among the best schools.You need to secure best staff and best everything with money,so you choose who'll pay for it.The church members or the students.It could fall either way.I don't think there are hard or fast rules to it.

@ Image

Yes I agree with you that good Education costs money, infact everything thing good, costs money. But then again, we are not talking about a university owned by a private investor whose primary aim would be to rasie money, but a church which _{(In my opinion)} is more or less a charity organisation. I am of the opinion that a church has no business opening a University at all. The command given them by Jesus was go into the world and preach the gospel.
Another issue is where did the funds for the establishment of these schools come from?? The congregation which patronise these churches regularly. And these congregation consists of both the richest of the rich in the society and the poorest of the poor in the society. So dont you think that it is rather unfair that a school that I contributed to its establishment would now lock me out. Its not like their congregation get shares from the proceeds of the school anyways.

Speaking of scholarships, I think every church should have such a scheme wether they own a university/school or not. If the church can only afford to put 5 studets on scholarship, then those five students should be based on merit. In the case were the church owns a school, then a quota system should be adopted (were 30% of the schools total admission every year should be reserved for members of their church/the less priviledged and then the fees of the other 70% should be geared towards running the school and covering the over-head incured by the 30%). I wonder what you would feel like if after the red-cross society finishes taking donations from people, companies, governments, the UN, e.t.c still charge people to receive healthcare.

You talked about he schools being a way of raising funds for the church, I say thats a lie. These schools are nothing but another source of income generation for the empires being built by these pentecostal churches. Even with these schools that charge exhorbitant tuitions, they still demand tithes and offering of all kinds every sunday service, tuesday bible studies, thursday miracle service, friday house fellowship, saturday revival meeting, monday prayer service,, saturday choir practice, e.t.c. They are not after nothing but the money.

I believe that there should be a hard and fast rule where if the University is owned by a church or charity organisation, then a certain percentage of their students should be non-paying students. Period.

_{My Opinion.}

@image123

Your point is well taken. You wrote that the missionaries used schools as a form of community development.

Image123:

The mission schools you referred to were funded by generous people in europe.Even before the missionary sets off for his/her journey and during their stay here.The primary aim of the missionaries was to bring christianity here.hospitals,schools etc were some of the encouragements used and also for community development.Churches today also have a aim of winning converts.today,building schools is not one of their methods of encouragement.

I want to ask,

What it would cost our millionaire pastors and their 'ministry' fat bank accounts to contribute to community development?

We were told by Jesus not to store treasures on earth were moth will destroy them but in heaven, so why are they concerned about their own comfort and safety rather than the plight of their neighbours?

@okija_juju and ow11
I believe we're on the same plane on this issue.As I earlier said,my post was not to criticize or encourage them.I just explained reasons why they and the missionaries charge differing amounts.It majorly depends on the motive.sincerely speaking some of the churches' motive for building some of their schools is for profit.whether such motive is right or wrong is another thing but that's what happens.The real church is not originally a charity organisation or a business centre.It is a congregation of God's people preparing for heaven and preaching the good news.Their delve into extra curricular activities is a personal denomination's decision

Image123:

@okija_juju and ow11
I believe we're on the same plane on this issue.As I earlier said,my post was not to criticize or encourage them.I just explained reasons why they and the missionaries charge differing amounts.It majorly depends on the motive.sincerely speaking some of the churches' motive for building some of their schools is for profit.whether such motive is right or wrong is another thing but that's what happens.The real church is not originally a charity organisation or a business centre.It is a congregation of God's people preparing for heaven and preaching the good news.Their delve into extra curricular activities is a personal denomination's decision

The christian mandate is not only to preach the gospel, but to show love to our fellow human beings (Although most churches never teact that truth) as directed by our lord Jesus christs. Christian offerings was originally meant to take care of the needy( acts 4: 32-35) before the church leadership hijacked it for themselves. So in effect the church is meant to be a charity instituitionalized by God. If a church must engage in establishing a university and the church is geniunely doing God's work, then the univsersity must either be free or highly subsidized. It is wrong and evil to make profit for one's self using God's name.

Thanks Kunle, I couldnt have said it better.
The start up capital for those schools were gotten from the poll of money contributed by both the poor and the rich members of those churches.
So what makes their schools any different from the schools ownwed by private-non-religious investors??

bicos church itself is not for the poor.

Because the god of mammon has found its way to our churches. It is as simple as that.

segyemaro:

bicos church itself is not for the poor.

best answer but please the true church of Jesus is for all. The "churches" we have today are nothing but religious social clubs.

watch wetyn una dey talk oooo,

Happy February.