Paul the Tent Maker

[Slider]

In Acts 18:1-3 (KJV) we read:

1. After these things Paul departed from Athens and came to Corinth;
2. And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; because that (Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome and came unto them.
3. And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers.

What bugs me about this is that I was playing a trivia game once and the question was "what was Paul's profession"? According to this game, he was a tent maker. I disagree. Aquila was a tent maker, and Paul knew the craft. But that does not make Paul a "tentmaker" by profession.

What was Paul's profession? His job? FIRST: He was an Apostle. That was his job and that's how he survived and made his living. The job was more important to him than his personal well being and comfort, but he travelled from place to place on the giving of his followers, and that probably included living expenses.

The second job I would've listed in that trivia question was he was a pharisee. The third may have been a lawyer and THEN (4th down the line) we can talk about "Paul the tentmaker".

Aside from my irritation at the trivia question, I believe this point is important for other reasons. I have read essays which point to this story as an ideology that Pastors, ministers, etc should NOT live off of the giving of parishioners. The arguement is that Paul paid his living expenses by making tents, and he gave all that came in from the collection to the poor and needy. Nothing in the Bible says that.

My belief which I will back by the Bible upon request is that Men of God have a right to draw from the offering IN PART to take care of their personal needs: rent, food, clothing, transportation, even entertainment. And if it seems lavish if a Man of God does so, so be it -- AS LONG AS THEY HAVE LIKE PASSION AS PAUL!

Let me elaborate on that... We don't know what luxuries Paul took for himself, and my suspiscion is that they were few. But he did have the right to use money given to him for the teaching as he saw fit. The problem is, Paul cared about very little other than the Gospel. He took care of GOD FIRST, then perhaps himself.

Now, if someone wants to bring up Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, etc... We can discuss that. Those two I have much distain for, but I actually admire a few things about them. But I'm not talking about folks like those. I'm talking about your local minister. He shouldn't have to make "tents". Substitute "tents" with plumming, bricklaying or working at McDonalds.... He should be willing to do so if that's what's required to keep his ministry going, but don't forbid the ox to eat the corn.

In short, Paul was not a tent maker by profession. He was an Apostle. That's how he made his living, and his living was spreading the Gospel.

So, thoughts? Comments?

 

[P31Woman]

2 Corinthians 11

8 I robbed other churches by accepting support from them in order to serve you. 9 And when I was with you and was in want, I did not burden any one, for my needs were supplied by the brethren who came from Macedo′nia. So I refrained and will refrain from burdening you in any way.

another passage comes to mind....let me find it.

here it is.

2 Thessalonians 3

RSV

6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us; we were not idle when we were with you, 8 we did not eat any one’s bread without paying, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not burden any of you. 9 It was not because we have not that right, but to give you in our conduct an example to imitate. 10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this command: If any one will not work, let him not eat. 11 For we hear that some of you are living in idleness, mere busybodies, not doing any work. 12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work in quietness and to earn their own living. 13 Brethren, do not be weary in well-doing.


I believe Paul was a tentmaker and used that as a tool when needed to help people come to know Christ.
(same way he used his citizenship and educational background as a mere tool to help him accomplish his ministry task)

Oh I agree with you on paying the preacher. We desire a full time pastor who has a certain level of education. Therefore we pay them a nice salary.

As far as Benny Hinn, Creflo Dollar, etc... they make me vomit.

Acts 18

Revised Standard Version (RSV)

18 After this he left Athens and went to Corinth. <sup class="versenum">2 </sup>And he found a Jew named Aq′uila, a native of Pontus, lately come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome. And he went to see them; <sup class="versenum">3 </sup>and because he was of the same trade he stayed with them, and they worked, for by trade they were tentmakers. <sup class="versenum">4 </sup>And he argued in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded Jews and Greeks.

 

[P31Woman]

I think I need to clarify something. I have never had the desire to attend a Church that was not governed by the congregation itself.

The Church not the pastor collects/controlls/ the monies given.

The members of the Church own the assets of the Chruch and vote what to pay the pastor. The pastor like many other positions in our Church are hired positions. He is an employee of the Church. The pay package we offer includes auto allowance, convention/educational expenses, housing allowance, FICA match, medical and disability insurance and a type of retirment plan. This is all part of his "pay package"

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Maybe I'm missing something, could someone please explain.
I don't see the democratic process anywhere in the Bible.
So why should the congregation decide who governs?
God should raise up a leader and that's the end of it.

 

[P31Woman]

Maybe I'm missing something, could someone please explain.
I don't see the democratic process anywhere in the Bible.
So why should the congregation decide who governs?
God should raise up a leader and that's the end of it.

Just because we have a congregational form of Church government that does not mean God does not raise up leaders within our fellowship to help lead and guide us.

We are a preisthood of believers.

 

[farouk]

It says that Paul was of the same trade, and abode with them.

So what's the problem?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Just because we have a congregational form of Church government that does not mean God does not raise up leaders within our fellowship to help lead and guide us.

We are a preisthood of believers.

Okay

 

[P31Woman]

Okay

HAAAAAAAAAAAHHAAAAAAAAAAA.

 

[farouk]

HAAAAAAAAAAAHHAAAAAAAAAAA.

?

 

[Deborah13]

Maybe I'm missing something, could someone please explain.
I don't see the democratic process anywhere in the Bible.
So why should the congregation decide who governs?
God should raise up a leader and that's the end of it.

I see what you are saying but no where does it say that the money that the people give to God for the care of the people, the church buildings, other ministries or missions and the pastor, etc belongs to the pastor or are his to distribute as he sees fit. There are those that try to say this for whatever their reasons are. It's God's money not the pastors.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Yes, church is a business, just like McDonalds.
Did the apostle Paul see that coming?
My church is Assembly of God. It is a church rule that when a new church starts, the people can choose to pay a pastor or not.
Of course, if you want a full time pastor you need to pay him.
Then the buildings, etc...
Now you have a business, incorporation, mortgage, insurance, and everything else the world requires.
It sure does change the way Paul did things.
But here's the thing, if God raises up a person to be a pastor, do we as a body of believers have a right to fire him?
I don't know the answer, just asking.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Maybe I'm missing something, could someone please explain.
I don't see the democratic process anywhere in the Bible.
So why should the congregation decide who governs?
God should raise up a leader and that's the end of it.

You must have missed this passage in your studies.

Acts 6 NASB
2 So the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables.
3 "Therefore, brethren, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task.
4 "But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word."
5 The statement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch.
​

In Acts 15, the congregation at Jerusalem was sought out, along with Peter and the deacons of the church, to determine if the Judean teaching that was going around in the churches of Asia that circumcision was necessary for salvation. And when "God should raise up a leader" how do you suppose that is confirmed? By a congregational vote!

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

You must have missed this passage in your studies.

Acts 6 NASB
2 So the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables.
3 "Therefore, brethren, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task.
4 "But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word."
5 The statement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch.
​

In Acts 15, the congregation at Jerusalem was sought out, along with Peter and the deacons of the church, to determine if the Judean teaching that was going around in the churches of Asia that circumcision was necessary for salvation. And when "God should raise up a leader" how do you suppose that is confirmed? By a congregational vote!

You're putting words in the mouth of God.
Nothing in Acts 15 says they voted on anything.
It says they were all in agreement.
When was the last time you were in a business meeting at your church when everyone was in agreement?
I never have been.

 

[Slider]

2 Corinthians 11


2 Thessalonians 3


I believe Paul was a tentmaker and used that as a tool when needed to help people come to know Christ.
(same way he used his citizenship and educational background as a mere tool to help him accomplish his ministry task)

Oh I agree with you on paying the preacher. We desire a full time pastor who has a certain level of education. Therefore we pay them a nice salary.

P31Woman,

You may be interested in starting in 2 Cor 9 on this subject. Paul instructed them to prepare a collection before he got there for the ministering of the Saints, which he later clearified as preaching. So to use 2 Cor 11 as evidence that Paul made tents to support his travels and well being doesn't seem accurate. In fact, it states just the opposite, and its one of the key set of verses that leads me to believe he was supported by preaching.

Same goes for 2 Thes 3... That's right, Paul said he would not eat another's bread for nought, but that he would earn it. But how? In his first letter to the Thesselonians, he explained it in verse 2:9. He said his labor would be to preach the gospel.

I do believe Paul spent some time making tents... But it is mentioned in Acts as helping brethren in their trade. It doesn't say he did it to support body, soul and travel. Certainly you would agree that practice would've gone against what Jesus said in Mark 6:8 and Luke 10:4.

I am happy to hear that you agree with me about paying your pastor though.... That's what Paul had in mind.

 

[Slider]

I think I need to clarify something. I have never had the desire to attend a Church that was not governed by the congregation itself.

The Church not the pastor collects/controlls/ the monies given.

The members of the Church own the assets of the Chruch and vote what to pay the pastor. The pastor like many other positions in our Church are hired positions. He is an employee of the Church. The pay package we offer includes auto allowance, convention/educational expenses, housing allowance, FICA match, medical and disability insurance and a type of retirment plan. This is all part of his "pay package"

In acts 4 they laid the collection at the Apostles feet. Then it was distributed... By whom? The Apostles!

Furthermore, if the OT is a shadow and a schoolmaster, I don't remember anyone voting what the Priests should do with the money or being able to fire them except God. Not that they didn't try, mind you... Korah, Dathan and Abiram tried, but that movement never got off the ground. In fact, it was buried! :toofunny

 

[Slider]

You must have missed this passage in your studies.

Acts 6 NASB
2 So the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables.
3 "Therefore, brethren, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task.
4 "But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word."
5 The statement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch.
​

In Acts 15, the congregation at Jerusalem was sought out, along with Peter and the deacons of the church, to determine if the Judean teaching that was going around in the churches of Asia that circumcision was necessary for salvation. And when "God should raise up a leader" how do you suppose that is confirmed? By a congregational vote!

Acts 6 was about chosing helps in the Church, not preachers or pastors. As for Acts 15, a careful study will show that Paul did not need the council at Jerusalem's decision. I'm not going to go into it much more than that.... It'd get off topic.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Acts 6 was about chosing helps in the Church, not preachers or pastors. As for Acts 15, a careful study will show that Paul did not need the council at Jerusalem's decision. I'm not going to go into it much more than that.... It'd get off topic.

One, Paul was not involved because Paul was, at the time, persecuting, imprisoning and killing Christians. These were the original apostles seeking the congregations approval. Elsewise, they would not have gone to the congregation to make the suggestion. It was about the congregation having a voice in the way the church is run. Period. Not going to argue with anyone about this. There is nothing unbiblical, but rather biblically exemplified, in congregational leadership.

Back to the topic, if Aquila and Priscilla were tent-makers, and Paul "was of the same occupation" (Acts 18:3), then they were all tent-makers. It is obvious.

 

[P31Woman]

Yes, church is a business, just like McDonalds.
Did the apostle Paul see that coming?
My church is Assembly of God. It is a church rule that when a new church starts, the people can choose to pay a pastor or not.
Of course, if you want a full time pastor you need to pay him.
Then the buildings, etc...
Now you have a business, incorporation, mortgage, insurance, and everything else the world requires.
It sure does change the way Paul did things.
But here's the thing, if God raises up a person to be a pastor, do we as a body of believers have a right to fire him?
I don't know the answer, just asking.

I believe Paul rented a hall to speak in for a couple of years?. Jesus spoke more about money than he did heaven and hell combined. Money is not a bad thing. Church is not a business but it does have responsibilities.

There are many quacks out there who claim to be from God. We will judge the angles one day. God is able to give us discernment.

 

[P31Woman]

Holman Bible Dictionary

Tyrannus

<table style="margin-left: 10px; float: right;"><tbody><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td></td></tr></tbody></table> (tee ran' nuhss) Latin form of the Greek term tyrant , a ruler with absolute authority. After Paul withdrew from the synagogue in Ephesus, he preached for two years at the lecture hall of Tyrannus (Acts 19:9 ). Tyrannus was either the owner of the hall or a prominent philosopher associated with it. According to some Western texts, Paul preached from 11:00 until 4:00 p.m., the time of the afternoon break from work. If accurate, this tradition explains the availability of the hall (schools generally met in the morning) and the freedom of “all Asia” to hear Paul during their “siesta.”

OK so it does not say he rented the hall. Not sure why I believe he did. I may have seen that suggested somewhere else?


As to the OP this would give me the idea that during his "off hours" Paul was probably working on those tents.

 

[Slider]

One, Paul was not involved because Paul was, at the time, persecuting, imprisoning and killing Christians. These were the original apostles seeking the congregations approval. Elsewise, they would not have gone to the congregation to make the suggestion. It was about the congregation having a voice in the way the church is run. Period. Not going to argue with anyone about this. There is nothing unbiblical, but rather biblically exemplified, in congregational leadership.

Back to the topic, if Aquila and Priscilla were tent-makers, and Paul "was of the same occupation" (Acts 18:3), then they were all tent-makers. It is obvious.

I didn't say Paul was involved in Acts 6... If you look back I said Paul was involved in Acts 15. The topic of whether the congregation has a voice in the way the church is run is another matter, which could make for interesting discussion.

My arguement is that Paul was an Apostle, and to note him and his profession as "tentmaker" is inaccurate. He made tents, but that was not his profession. No doubt he did for some time make tents (it does say he knew and was of the craft), but at that present time, his profession was "Apostle" first and foremost. This is how he made his income and how his travel expenses were taken care of.