Ihedinobi:
I submit that the ministers of the Gospel are entitled to upkeep from those to whom they minister. I am saying nothing about the tithe because I agree that Jesus did not directly command it for His servants. That is to keep things simple. My contention is purely this: are ministers of the Gospel entitled by Scriptures to the wages of a worker or are they not?

Is any Christian doing right in putting all his energies to work in teaching the Gospel and prayer and exercising his right to be provided for by the people he serves ordinarily? Did Paul set a precedent for "part-time" ministry, that is, a pastor who also fends for himself? What really did Paul do at Corinth and Ephesus?

debosky:

What do you mean by 'wages of a worker' in this instance? Can you define this or do we use commonly understood definitions?

Reading further in Corinthians, we see that what Paul received weren't 'wages' as one would receive for working for an employer per se, but supplies to meet his needs - even when he was ostensibly 'working' for someone else - the Corinthians.

I do know that Paul refers to a worker deserves his wages elsewhere e.g. in Timothy, but that is not what is described in Corinthians to my understanding.

I would turn the question around to say were there recorded examples of those who worked in 'full-time' ministry and were solely reliant on provision by the people served and what this provision constituted?

As for the 72, the 'wages' as far as we know them are food and drink and temporary accommodation in the towns they visited - and note that they subsequently returned and did not remain in those towns they visited permanently. These are, by definition itinerant preachers who are deserving of food and shelter - meeting their needs. That is not equivalent to a wage in my view.

Image123: nice thread. It depends on administration and personal decision. Paul's decision was personal and not a law.Even he sad that they as ministers had power/right to do otherwise.

Zikkyy:

who give them power? what if the some members of congregation refused to cooperate? the pastor will chase them away?

Candour: @Ihedinobi, beautiful thread indeed.

Paul received from some of his churches to meet his needs, not build up wealth to appear in a rich list somewhere. He could have made enough to buy himself a ship, build a chateau or have the best chariot and litter but he didn't. The man would rather pay for the needs of those that were with him like he told the Ephesian elders than pile up the cash. That is selflessness and that is the least expected of a steward of the gospel. A businessman is in business to make money, i dont think any sane Christian will say the same applies to a pastor. The gospel work comes with a great cost and great deprivations.

What has changed now that makes a MOG look up to match the lifestyle of the music and football superstars in their Conspicuous Consumption rather than imitate those who risked life and limb to bring the gospel to our fathers in Africa? think about it

The gospel is not a means to make money. If you want to make money, stick to secular pursuits.

Pastors should receive from their flock but please, don't build a business on it. The sanctity of the pulpit is corrupted when they do and that is why crooks, rapists, murderers even native doctors feel so much at ease preaching and enjoying the tag of a pastor. It has become an all comers affair. Just have the charisma and you're ready to go.

If a pastor is honest, he should know the difference between meeting needs and gratifying obscene hedonistic desires

DrummaBoy: If we look up Paul's analogy in 1 Cor 9 taken from the law about not briddling the ox that threshes the wheat we find there a veritable reason for ministers to be in paid ministry.

But could it be that many more ministers need to look up Paul example as being probably the most effective of Jesus' apostles and still he worked part time? Would it be better that more full time ministers go find work to do?

Church history shows that paid ministry started some 300 yrs after Christ. We may deduce then that the NT was not so much concerned with full time ministry even though it was not discouraged.

What we have in our hands today in Nigeria is a pandemic. In a space of 1km square you will find at the least five churches in the suburbs. With most of these ministers full time. Is it the economy? Is it joblessness? Is it tithe? Or is it laziness?

I think we need more of the Pauline example of part time ministry and still effective, than the OP justification for paid ministry.

DrummaBoy: If we look up Paul's analogy in 1 Cor 9 taken from the law about not briddling the ox that threshes the wheat we find there a veritable reason for ministers to be in paid ministry.

But could it be that many more ministers need to look up Paul example as being probably the most effective of Jesus' apostles and still he worked part time? Would it be better that more full time ministers go find work to do?

Church history shows that paid ministry started some 300 yrs after Christ. We may deduce then that the NT was not so much concerned with full time ministry even though it was not discouraged.

What we have in our hands today in Nigeria is a pandemic. In a space of 1km square you will find at the least five churches in the suburbs. With most of these ministers full time. Is it the economy? Is it joblessness? Is it tithe? Or is it laziness?

I think we need more of the Pauline example of part time ministry and still effective, than the OP justification for paid ministry.

Goshen360: Ministry is not an opportunity to take from people in your care, it's a privilege to serve or to service. Look at the life of our Lord, you will understand.

Ihedinobi:

According to the Scriptures, do ministers of the Gospel have any entitlement to a wage or not?

Ihedinobi:
According to the Scriptures, do ministers of the Gospel have any entitlement to a wage or not?

Ihedinobi:

Actually, Paul was not a part-time minister at all. Those who served in the Gospel and still had still kept day jobs were probably elders in local assemblies.

Ihedinobi:

The job of elders was administration of the local church, a bit like the job of the first deacons. The job of the likes of Paul was to take the Gospel everywhere that God took them. It's not very practicable to hold another job down when you're studying the Scriptures, reading commentaries, making commentaries, laboring in prayer as a matter of responsibility for other believers and probably travelling everywhere you see an opportunity to plant the Gospel or water it.

Mr anony:
Yes they do (1Cor 9:13-14)

Edit:
To expand on my answer; Ministers are only entitled to a wage that meets their basic needs and nothing more. (luke 10:1-9)

Zikkyy:

don't know about the wage bit, but they can receive support.

Candour: @Ihedinobi, beautiful thread indeed.

Paul received from some of his churches to meet his needs, not build up wealth to appear in a rich list somewhere. He could have made enough to buy himself a ship, build a chateau or have the best chariot and litter but he didn't. The man would rather pay for the needs of those that were with him like he told the Ephesian elders than pile up the cash. That is selflessness and that is the least expected of a steward of the gospel. A businessman is in business to make money, i dont think any sane Christian will say the same applies to a pastor. The gospel work comes with a great cost and great deprivations.

What has changed now that makes a MOG look up to match the lifestyle of the music and football superstars in their Conspicuous Consumption rather than imitate those who risked life and limb to bring the gospel to our fathers in Africa? think about it

The gospel is not a means to make money. If you want to make money, stick to secular pursuits.

delusioned people still think that the solution to their problem is going to church and wasting their salivas.
See, the obvious solution to peverty amongst poor christians is that their pastors should GIVE THEM GOOD MONEY ,GIVE UP THEIR WEALTH, CHANGE THEIR LIVES, AFTERALL PAUL SAID SILVER AND GOLD I HAVE NONE, meaning first dont have money , see, they will never ever believe this unless they come out of their denial states. I really dont mind them, its those who are still wasting their money

Pastors should receive from their flock but please, don't build a business on it. The sanctity of the pulpit is corrupted when they do and that is why crooks, rapists, murderers even native doctors feel so much at ease preaching and enjoying the tag of a pastor. It has become an all comers affair. Just have the charisma and you're ready to go.

If a pastor is honest, he should know the difference between meeting needs and gratifying obscene hedonistic desires

DrummaBoy:
However, it is becoming increasingly difficult for this to happen with the place that money has taken in today's church. A lot of ministers today no longer serve God, they serve mammon! And the number one culprit in this matter (the Oga at the top of it all - apologies to christembassey) is tithing. This is the reason God, by the Holy Spirit, in the heart of men, is asking us to find out the place of tithing in the New Testament church. Unfortunately, in all the debates about tithing, no one has been able to supply one scripture from the whole of the bible, and particulary the NT, were anyone paid tithes on wages he earned.

Bidam: And i am saying you are still wrong about the tithe and offering issue.You can easily quote Malachi 2:15 to justify the marriage covenant as a principle which is nowhere found in NT scriptures apart from the one Paul advised on bishops and deacons,and you re not one.When the covenant of malachi 3:8 is quoted you guys start crying blue murder.There are strong evidences that Paul actually demands that ministers be paid their dues .You can't escape it.Not with all this your maradona dribbling to score zero points.

1 CORINTHIANS 9:7-11 (Paul)
7 Who goes to war any time at his own expense? who plants a vineyard, and does not eat of the fruit of it? or who feeds a flock, and does not drink of the milk of the flock?
8 Do I say these things as a man? or does not the law say the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, You shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox who treads out the corn. Does God take care for oxen?
10 Or does he say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he who ploughs should plough in hope; and that he who threshes in hope should be a partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown to you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

GALATIANS 6:6 (Paul)
6 Let him who is being taught in the word share with him who teaches in all good things.

DrummaBoy:

Bidam, I had hoped to ignore you on this thread but it seem I can no longer. I would trust God to respond to you with all the Christian restraint I can muster so as not to reply you with the same spirit with which you reply my quotes on this thread. That said; let me make my position clear with some questions to you with the hope that you will "get it" this time.

1. From what I have written on this thread so far I stated that there is no account in scripture New/Old Testament were anyone paid a tithe on his wages or income: Question to you Bidam: Can you show me one scripture were anyone paid a tithe on his income in the bible?

2. Following 1 Corinthians 9:14 and the other scriptures you yourself quoted above, I said that paying ministers for their service to God's people is not un-scriptural. However, it should not be the norm rather it should be an exception. Question to you, Bidam: Can you show me one scripture in the New Testament were it was said or insinuated that Paul or any of the apostles of the Lamb or any Christian leader for that matter was paid a salary?

Bidam:

Jesus had an accountant,

Bidam:

Paul was ministered to,

Bidam:

as for the first question you never put into consideration the occupations,vocations of the early churches in contrast with this day and dispensation.It is just like asking me to put on the shoes and clothings and eat the food of the early church.Did you see the folly? Everything must not be written in black and white and that is why we have the Holy Spirit who intepretes the mind of the Father comparing scriptures with scriptures.

1. From what I have written on this thread so far I stated that there is no account in scripture New/Old Testament were anyone paid a tithe on his wages or income: Question to you Bidam: Can you show me one scripture were anyone paid a tithe on his income in the bible?

2. Following 1 Corinthians 9:14 and the other scriptures you yourself quoted above, I said that paying ministers for their service to God's people is not un-scriptural. However, it should not be the norm rather it should be an exception. Question to you, Bidam: Can you show me one scripture in the New Testament were it was said or insinuated that Paul or any of the apostles of the Lamb or any Christian leader for that matter was paid a salary?

Ihedinobi:
Please explain the "support" part to me. What do you refer to as "support"? And support for what?

Image123:
.......So, a christian would need to be soundly drilled and convinced to agree that a minister of the gospel deserves to be paid. He is expected to only perhaps have his basic needs needs met. Basic needs in this case referring to feeding and clothing. There should be no thought for his family, he would not educate and raise his children, he would not send them to good schools,

Image123:
......he would not have enough as to be able to do all the things that you want and pray to do, becuase he is a minister abi.

Image123:
You want to build house and become landlord of tenantS self, you want to buy car and change cars, buy for your wife and friends, you want to travel for courses, and go for vacation, you pray to be able to give quality education to your loved ones and kids in any part of the world, and to have access to the best medical care possible. But your minister should go and sit down and thank God that he can get breakfast today, shameless christains abound here.

Image123:
It is normal christian duty to also minister unto them in carnal things. If you want to be paid and receive income constantly, you should want your neighbour to also receive constantly. You shouldn't be going about campaigning that they should receive only when you feel like giving them cheerfully.

Image123:
They had the power and choice to stop working if they wanted to, and the church was to take care of them. You do not even need a Bible to know this. Even wicked thieves and politicians know this, but some people are too religious to know this.

Joagbaje: Here s difference between part time or lay pastor and a full time pastor. A lay pastor has his own job and business. He could be a banker, oil worker . Etc. 99% of pastors in our ministry have their jobs and businesses .they don't require support from church .

Joagbaje:
But few who are into full time ministry , some have to resign from their lucrative jobs for the sake of their responsibility . Such has to be put on salary

DrummaBoy:

Sir, the position you stated above that Paul was not a part time minister and thus a full time minister, and that it was the elders, more like Deacons, that were working part time, cannot be supported by any scripture in the NT (I would be happy if you can point them out to me). We must understand that the concept of a full time or a part time minister was alien to the thinking of first century Christians; that concept was made popular in our time. Yes, in Acts 6:4 we see the apostles mention that there was a need for them to give themselves to the preaching of the word and to prayer, but that statement is no evidence for a full time ministry that is supported by some kind of salary or pay. The impression that Paul gives us in Phillipians 4 when he received support from the Phillipian church was that what was given to him was a gift and not his pay.

[color=#000099][/color]

So, it is obvious from this passage that the support Paul received from this church was a gift and not a pay. A gift depicts a free will giving; a blessing of some sort, to another. A pay is meeting a debt and Romans 4:4 gives the clearest sciptural difference btw a gift and a pay. If Paul was receiving his pay, there would not have been the element of gratitude that is so well expressed in that passage. I believe this is how both Paul and the other apostles were supported in ministry: via free will giving by those who they had ministered to and who in return chose to minister to them. All of this was done even as they engaged in what we shall call a "full time" ministry today. They got this example not from the Old Testament but from Jesus' ministry himself that was shown to have been supported by a number of women. And I maintain that the fact that women supported Jesus' ministry gives us an idea of how lean his treasury was: we get this from the fact that women were never the leading money makers in those days and despite the meager allowance they earned, they supported Jesus' ministry. Now, Jesus made things worse: it was bad enough that his treasury was lean, he went further to make a thief his treasurer in the person of Judas. What can we glean from our Lord here: No man can serve two master; it is either you serve God or mammon. Jesus showed an attitude to money in ministry that some of our Pastor and leaders can learn from - even though I do not subscribe to the idea of making a thief a church treasurer but it gives us an idea of the attitude of our Lord to money.

Now, my point is this: the idea of full time ministry work in the NT, that is supported by some kind of salary cannot be found anywhere in the scriptures. I concur with those who say that church history shows that paid ministry did not come into Christendom until some 300 years after Christ. And, whatever led to this idea, is not necessarily wrong. It is ably supported by 1 Corinthians 9:14. But I still think that in the midst of the confusion that we have found ourselves in today's church, the model of ministry that we see in the NT, that is supported by free will giving should be returned to.

However, it is becoming increasingly difficult for this to happen with the place that money has taken in today's church. A lot of ministers today no longer serve God, they serve mammon! And the number one culprit in this matter (the Oga at the top of it all - apologies to christembassey) is tithing. This is the reason God, by the Holy Spirit, in the heart of men, is asking us to find out the place of tithing in the New Testament church. Unfortunately, in all the debates about tithing, no one has been able to supply one scripture from the whole of the bible, and particulary the NT, were anyone paid tithes on wages he earned.

So, I welcome this discuss on the place of paid ministers in today's church wholeheartedly because it will lead us inevitably to understanding the true place of money in the church today.

BTW, Ihedinobi, you mention that full time ministers like the apostles are different from elders in the church. You claim the former were on some kind of pay while the latter were not - that it was the elders that worked, albiet, part time. Well, Peter referred to himself as an elder in 1 Peter 5:1. From that scripture one can claim that the NT saw elders as leaders in the church generally and, as I have said before, those who worked "full time" were supported by gifts and free will offering and the others who were not full time may also have enjoyed a similar largesse. However, if we follow your permutation that elders worked part time, then Peter, as an elder, also must have had a side job he did like Paul who was a tent-maker.

In conclusion for now, we must not under rate the power of God himself to providing for the vision he himself has given to his servants. If God send a man, God will move people to support him financially, without that man needing to resort to cunning fables to extort money from people. That is how the NT preachers lived. Paid ministers today should not be the norm; it should come in extreme cases when the need is very apparent.

Image123: Some folks here are just plain ridiculous and have failed woefully in the second great commandment, to love your neighbour as yourself. i guess it would have been better if some had no Bible like most of the first century christians. So, a christian would need to be soundly drilled and convinced to agree that a minister of the gospel deserves to be paid. He is expected to only perhaps have his basic needs needs met. Basic needs in this case referring to feeding and clothing. There should be no thought for his family, he would not educate and raise his children, he would not send them to good schools, he would not have enough as to be able to do all the things that you want and pray to do, becuase he is a minister abi. What i see is people who have little or no field experience of what service is. They are just here to run mouth as talk is very cheap these days. You want to build house and become landlord of tenantS self, you want to buy car and change cars, buy for your wife and friends, you want to travel for courses, and go for vacation, you pray to be able to give quality education to your loved ones and kids in any part of the world, and to have access to the best medical care possible. But your minister should go and sit down and thank God that he can get breakfast today, shameless christains abound here.
1Ti 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine.
Gal 6:6 Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things.
Rom 15:27 It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things.

It is normal christian duty to also minister unto them in carnal things. If you want to be paid and receive income constantly, you should want your neighbour to also receive constantly. You shouldn't be going about campaigning that they should receive only when you feel like giving them cheerfully.
Phi 4:10 But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that now at the last your care of me hath flourished again; wherein ye were also careful, but ye lacked opportunity.
Phi 4:14 Notwithstanding ye have well done, that ye did communicate with my affliction.
It is evident that the apostles received from church members and that it was their right.

1Co 9:4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?
1Co 9:6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
They had the power and choice to stop working if they wanted to, and the church was to take care of them. You do not even need a Bible to know this. Even wicked thieves and politicians know this, but some people are too religious to know this.