It is not uncommon to hear churches rally their congregations to “build God a house” during any church building fund campaign.
However, this reason or thrust is flawed. Because God does not need a house.
Being new-covenanted Christians with the gift of the Holy Spirit , we’re the house or temple where the presence of God dwells.
Hence, it is clear that God does not need a physical structure to dwell among His people like how He did during the old testament era.
So why do I choose to support the church building project-“Arise & Build” of City Harvest Church (CHC)?
My reasons for supporting the “Arise & Build”
Though I’m a member of CHC, I’m aware that as a Christ-follower I am not obliged to give to the “Arise & Build” church building fund.
Nonetheless, it is with the same conviction as a Christ-follower in which I’m equally aware that I’m obliged to appropriately invest my finances in where it matters to Him as His steward to fulfill His kingdom purposes.
That said, here are my personal reasons that convinced me in supporting CHC and this campaign:
Let’s build up His true House
I consider it a privilege to be able to share and play a part of this history-making project that glorifies God in a way that represents how progressive the Church of Jesus ought to be.
The world has always attempted to undermine and inhibit the influence (His power and love) of the Church in the secular. But it is my earnest prayer and desire to see this change. And I believe CHC will be one of key catalysts or agents to bring about that change.
In conclusion, though we need not build God a house, it is with such building projects that build our lives up (the true house) as we do our part as Christ-followers to arise, build and establish His kingdom purposes on earth.
Andrew: Inside & Insights 
Wow, thanks for sharing, bro! Think tis sharing not only helps explain… think it also encourages other brothers and sisters from other churches to give to their own church building funds too 😀
Hi yeu@ann,
Thanks for finding what I’ve shared useful. However, please note that I simplified the reasons without providing much additional basis.
For instance, on the third point of “trustworthy leadership”, I had personal encounters which I had ‘checked’ on their credibility. I will just relate one encounter here.
Early last year, I had queried on their financial governance and was corresponding online with one of their staff. Quite (pleasant)surprisingly, one of their Directors invited me to meet him.
During that quite long meeting, he patiently presented and explained to me the checks and balances that were in place to deter any conflict of interest or corruption from occurring.
Through that encounter, I appreciated their transparency in revealing to me much needed information to assure me that my money/tithes are placed in good hands. Other encounters are observations from how I see that the money is spent where it matters most- on people.
So what am I saying… I think giving to church building projects is a personal matter and based on personal convictions so reasons might differ from person to person or from one church to another.
My reasons here ought not to be simply ‘replicated’ as it is personal to me, but it can serve as guiding factors lar…
Hope my further explanation will help you to make a more informed decision in making whatever faith-giving that you’re embarking on 🙂
you contradicted yourself
Hi yoyo,
How am I contradicting myself?
Please feel free to point out the specifically, I would be glad to address it.
Cheers.
It’s so simple to explain that it is a house for God and hide behind the true reasons to justify its needs. But in reality is it simply more than a house or a building just for congregation services. In this case, it is definitely Yes as it is goes beyond its needs.
Maybe its for the church’s ego, a sort of image as the mother of all churches.
Maybe it is about being in power, to be able to take charge of a perpetual money-making machine for those in charge.
Maybe it’s for political survival, as a bargaining chip to be in a position not to be taken for granted by the authorities, sort of bargaining chip
We will never know the true hidden intentions, it there are any.
‘The world has always attempted to undermine and inhibit the influence (His power and love) of the Church in the secular. But it is my earnest prayer and desire to see this change. And I believe CHC will be one of key catalysts or agents to bring about that change.’
I wonder what is this push by Christians like yourself against the secular world as we know it in Singapore. As christianity and secularism (as well as other religious and political systems) differ greatly country to country, this comparison of our secular system to other nations (I would assume Europe? UK?) is a strawman argument.
Our secular system has managed to preserve the peace among the various religious segments of our society, keeping a nuetral political space while allowing a great deal of religious freedom.
But all of a sudden Christians like yourself (notice that it has been only the christians, like Thio Li Ann) are pushing for a non-secular society. What can your reasons or motivations be for this push? Is it self-serving or selfish? To postelyse you faith more aggressively in our society at the possible expense of other faiths?
And I certainly do not believe that CHC wishes to have anon-secular space here. As I recall Kong Hee himself wrote an admirable piece on religious tolerance in his blog.
And trust me having a ‘golden’ temple for your church is certainly not going to win over converts; in fact, as can be seen from numerous postings and letters to the press, it has already created a backlash – certainly not a prudent way to promote your church.
Hi sloo,
When I wrote,”The world has always attempted to undermine and inhibit the influence (His power and love) of the Church in the secular.”… I didn’t mean it as a hostile or aggressive manner in trying to push (or impose) our beliefs unto others as what you have described in your comments.
What I meant is because over the years, we who call ourselves Christians have mostly messed things up and provoked the wrath from the secular/public with our over-zealousness without practising love thy neighbour.
Hence, when we speak, most times in goes on deaf ears or readily shot down. In other words, we (Christians or churches) are the cause for the public/secular to detest us because of our ‘disrespectful’ manners and words.
What I hope/pray is that we Christians can make things right in practising our beliefs and values in a manner that was intended and modeled by Jesus Christ.
We hope not only to accurately represent Christ, but also re-presented Him as He ought to whether it is in church or in public/secular space that there might be peace or co-harmony as we respect each other and embrace diversity.
So you’re right to say that CHC does not wish to have a non-secular space here as what you had recalled what Kong Hee had wrote on religious tolerance in his blog.
Hi Andrew
Thanks for clarifying and in this instance perhaps I am guilty of bias perception – my apologies.
I have many wonderful Christian friends, including my partner, who are totally open minded and understanding and yet their voices are diminished under the aggressive noise of hardline fundamentalists. It saddens me that may of these hardliners from different faiths have chosen to close their minds to diversity. Thus my sensitised awareness to any attempt to undermine our secular and peaceful co-existence with others that may not share the same faiths as us.
Hi Sloo,
No problem… I understand where you’re coming from 🙂
the house of god is singular.one place and therefore only one god. and then you have one,just one for each city or nation.
that’s what you should be part of and build, not hundreds and thousands of church buildings in your city and thereafter claimed to be the house of god.
what you have now is schism which is due to your idolatrous doctrine.
so in effect, you are not building THE house of god at all but instead, building “foxholes” for your pastors
I guess the true test now is what the church does with the 4-6 million that’s freed up from the “purchase” of the venue. (“Purchase” because it’s actually a controlling interest in the company that controls tenant-ship of Suntec City)
Do keep us updated.
Erm for Suntec- it seems more like Arise and Rent.
I wonder why the director who saw you didnt do the same for the rest of Singapore when the news broke 🙂
hi thanks for visiting and leaving a comment.
the word Build in the Arise & Build does not refer to a physical building. It refers to the spiritual building of our lives.
However, you’re right that Suntec is used on s rental basis. What I know is that CHC owns a percentage of Suntec shares, hence it will receive dividends and have priority in using the facilties.
On your last remark, it is anyone guess… But if we go by protocal, it is not the director that should be the media spokesperson. 😉
Now that you know what these are, it is time for you to take actions to stop this from happening.
The reason is, they believe, following they get their children, there is no individual
life for them.