Paul the Tent Maker

[Deborah13]

I did answer your questions. You asked why I was comparing Paul's ministry to that of a Pastors. My response that with the exception of possibly being a prophet, Paul's ministry at one point or another was that of a Apostle, Pastor, Evangelist and a teacher. So since at times he was a pastor, I can' compare his ministry to that of a pastor.

Second, I noted the scriptures I gave apply to all of the 5 parts of the ministry. If nothing else, Gal 6:6 says to communicate good things to them that teach. All 5 parts teach, so it applies to all. Coupled with the fact that Paul was at one time or another fulfilling at least 4 of the 5, I don't see the relevance of your question.

So, just in case it isn't clear. Paul was an Apostle. He was an evangelist. He was a pastor. He was also a teacher. He may not have been a prophet, so I'll leave that out (although I can show he gave at least on prophecy).

I also clearly showed what my intentions were and what I was trying to establish. Paul made tents, but he was not a tent maker in the sense that he used it to support his well being. Through the scriptures I gave, he clearly used the offering to finance his travels, his food and his board.

So now it confuses me that you believe I don't want any discussion. I answered both your questions and have clearly defined my purposes and have supported them with scripture. If you feel I have not addressed a question, please let me know.

I'm confused because I think everyone that has responsed agrees that pastors should be supported by their congregation for whatever services they provide, preaching, services in wedding, funerals, counseling, visiting the sick, there are hours and hours of things that pastors may do, in some churches more than others. Yes the ox needs to be fed when he is working. So I didn't get why you kept bringing up Paul. Paul did so much for nothing (wages) that I really didn't see how it supported what appeared to be your cause. The disciples took nothing with them when they went out. The people opened their homes to them, they fed them, and I'm sure whatever they needed, was given to them. Peter, had a wife and mother-in-law he was responsible for too, although the women may have had a business themselves. The whole point is support is not for the individual, per say, but the spreading of the gospel. All the ministries should be making disciples even those in praise and worship teams or Sunday/Bible study teachers. All are to the same purpose as teachers. However, a pastor MAY have the most difficult job of all depending on the size of his congregation and the number of people involved in the helps ministry within the church.
Until just the last ten yrs or so, the local Baptist church only had a pastor one Sunday a month because like the pastors of old he had a circuit he traveled, one church could not support him. However, their pastor now still has to work at an outside job. His house is provided and whatever compensation they pay him.

 

[Dustoftheearth]

So Slider, why are you comparing Paul's ministry support to that of a pastor's. I've been confused about this from the beginning of the thread and not seen this addresed. The ministries are very different. It would seem to be more relevent to give scripture that supports the support of pastors and others even in the congregation. If that is your intention, which is what I am understanding from the OP.

Please define what is the goal here. What is being determined?

Hi Deborah13

Can you tell me what is the ‘ministry’ of a pastor?

Paul was an apostle, but he was not an Elder of any local Church. Peter and John were also apostles, and also Elders of local Church

 

[Dustoftheearth]

Micah 3:9 Now hear this, heads of the house of Jacob And rulers of the house of Israel, Who abhor justice And twist everything that is straight,
Micah 3:10 Who build Zion with bloodshed And Jerusalem with violent injustice.
Micah 3:11 Her leaders pronounce judgment for a bribe, Her priests instruct [teach] for a price And her prophets divine for money. Yet they lean on the LORD saying, "Is not the LORD in our midst? Calamity will not come upon us."

 

[farouk]

I think Paul also didn't want to be a burden on those who were young in the faith.

 

[Deborah13]

Hi Deborah13

Can you tell me what is the ‘ministry’ of a pastor?

Paul was an apostle, but he was not an Elder of any local Church. Peter and John were also apostles, and also Elders of local Church

.
I understood the OP author to be comparing the ministry of Paul to a pastor in the church today and the support of the pastor in the church today.
I am sure I do not need to tell you what the ministry of a present day pastor may entail.

 

[Mitspa]

I dont recall any scripture that says Paul took that which he said he had right to? But I do recall many scriptures that say he labored with his own hands so others could not claim he took money for his labors in the gospel. I even remember him boasting in this fact. Not sure any would use Paul to justify the greed we see at work in the church today?

I must say, of all the issues that are working against the gospel, the greed of these "men of God" is the shame of us all.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

The issue is the exact same today as it was in Paul's time, and explains why Paul was a tent-maker, his vocation, whether that is acceptable to some or not. He did not get paid to be an Apostle. That was his calling, not his career. That was what he did because God called him to it, not what he did to eat and be clothed and housed. For that, Paul was a tent-maker.

The following is a synopsis of the lesson at http://www.globalopps.org/papers/whydid.htm and details why it is important to recognize Paul for the manual laborer he was, because it has great application for today's missionary journeys throughout the world.

“Why did Paul make tents?” may be the most important question to ask as we consider 21st century of missions.

The question arises because many countries in our “post-post-colonial” age restrict the entry of missionaries, but welcome people with expertise they need, so many Christians are using their professions to make Jesus Christ known abroad -- as Paul used his tent-making craft in the first century. Paul’s amazing pioneering strategy emerges when we carefully correlate his letters with Luke’s account in Acts. Little attention has been given to Paul’s tent-making because the Christian community in general and the mission community in particular is mainly interested in professionals for creative access to that 70% to 80% of the world which restricts the entry of missionaries. But Paul did not use his craft to get work visas, nor even primarily for financial support, which he said he could receive from churches. But he did not seek that for himself! This adds importance to the question.

Why did Paul support himself with his own manual labor when he did not have to do it? Can his model in the first century have value for us in the twenty-first? I am convinced we cannot finish world evangelization unless we adapt and implement Paul’s larger strategy to our post-modern world.

Saul of Tarsus was his given name when he was called personally Jesus Christ to evangelize the Gentiles. He understood that to mean the whole Roman empire. Where would he find hundreds of missionaries? There was no church yet in Antioch, and he had just destroyed the one in Jerusalem—turning all its members into refugees, prisoners or corpses. But even if he could have found the personnel, where would he have found funding for so many? He had just confiscated the property of Jerusalem believers and it was now safely in the hands of the enemy.

After some initial evangelism, Paul, “like a skilled master builder” devised an ingenious strategy which provided all the personnel he needed and required virtually no foreign funds. He produced both as he went along. His Spirit-guided tent-making strategy was intentionally designed to produce missionary lay movements everywhere. There are five reasons why Paul was a tent-maker, and why his strategy should be used today, why we should proudly declare him a tent-maker and use this first-century strategy to reach the twenty-first century world.

1. It is the only complete strategy for pioneering in the New Testament.
2. The Holy Spirit preserved it in great detail, so we would adapt and use it.
3. It has produced remarkable results throughout history wherever it has been implemented.
4. It can solve our problems of diminishing personnel and rising costs.
5. It would make use of today’s global job market which God designed to help us finish world evangelization. It is a phenomenon of our day—nonexistent in the 1950s when a few of us went abroad. The job market and Paul’s strategy perfectly fit each other, yet we have largely ignored both.
​

There is a great deal more on this website supporting the vision and genius God gave Paul in adopting a vocation that could carry him throughout the world without robbing the churches to pay for it all. I urge you to read it, and open your mind beyond preconceived notions.

 

[farouk]

the:

I think the New Testament does provide an excellent manual to go back to, as regards a pioneering manual for evangelism and church-planting, actually.

Even evangelicals and Fundamentalists have their traditions which might sometimes militate against this.

 

[Sparkey]

Disclaimer: I'm not a carpenter but I've seen an actor on TV who played one.

When my friend and I labored to build his place of residence he explained to me the need for care especially when pouring foundations.
He was a finish carpenter and invited me to consider a consequence to laying a foundation even slightly out of plumb. What if we were off by as little as a fraction of a degree? he asked. I couldn't see his point so he continued, "If that were the case, when we go up two stories to the kitchen, there would be no shim big enough to hide the mistake." The light still had not gone on in my mind so he continued, "I wouldn't be able to hang the cabinets in the kitchen. They must be able to be set square against the wall at 90°. It's like I always say, measure twice, cut once."

So I don't tell this story to say that Paul needed to have a trade degree to complement his work as a tent maker, but only to point out that there is a difference between laying a foundation (like the Apostles did) and the finish work one may expect from a roofer or a Pastor, for that matter. Trouble that I see isn't about the well laid foundation, but instead it is the lack of properly skilled laborers. Time to go to our prayer closets, as the Spirit leads, and pray for those in authority above us. I'm hoping for a Godsend here in terms of "finish carpenters".

 

[Slider]

I'm confused because I think everyone that has responsed agrees that pastors should be supported by their congregation for whatever services they provide, preaching, services in wedding, funerals, counseling, visiting the sick, there are hours and hours of things that pastors may do, in some churches more than others. Yes the ox needs to be fed when he is working. So I didn't get why you kept bringing up Paul. Paul did so much for nothing (wages) that I really didn't see how it supported what appeared to be your cause.

I kept bringing Paul up because he was the person we were talking about. He was the one who helped Aquila make tents, and the main subject was whether that supported his ministry. People asked questions, brought up scripture and made comments. I responded.

As for Paul doing so much for nothing, I'm sure he did at many times. However, he also noted otherwise.

 

[Slider]

I dont recall any scripture that says Paul took that which he said he had right to? But I do recall many scriptures that say he labored with his own hands so others could not claim he took money for his labors in the gospel. I even remember him boasting in this fact. Not sure any would use Paul to justify the greed we see at work in the church today?

I must say, of all the issues that are working against the gospel, the greed of these "men of God" is the shame of us all.

Paul did mention he labored with his own hands in Acts 20:34. Other than that, his labor was preaching the gospel. Not sure what this talk of greed is about. I know it's out there, but I'm talking about an honest man of God preaching the gospel and being supported for it.

 

[Slider]

The issue is the exact same today as it was in Paul's time, and explains why Paul was a tent-maker, his vocation, whether that is acceptable to some or not. He did not get paid to be an Apostle. That was his calling, not his career. That was what he did because God called him to it, not what he did to eat and be clothed and housed. For that, Paul was a tent-maker.

And this is pretty much the line of thinking I'm against. The scripture I've given shows that his travel expenses including lodging and food was paid for by the preaching. Just like the disciples Jesus sent out by twos.

 

[farouk]

I Corinthians 9.18

 

[Mitspa]

Paul did mention he labored with his own hands in Acts 20:34. Other than that, his labor was preaching the gospel. Not sure what this talk of greed is about. I know it's out there, but I'm talking about an honest man of God preaching the gospel and being supported for it.

Paul said he labored more abundantly than they all, this included the physical labor that he did through the grace of God. Yes greed is a real problem, i think most can see this.
I dont know any that dont claim to be "honest men of God" and I believe many start out that way. The desire to have a larger church a "growing ministry" etc.. can all look very godly in many ways but cause many to stray from what once was the desire of their heart. Jesus Christ and the gospel of His Glory, has taken a back seat to many of these things.

Paul said he would not ever allow any shame to be brought the message he preached by appearance of personal gain.
As one who has helped build a very large church, and then leave that same church because of such issues, I can say this is a very real problem.
If one sees the heart of Paul was to bring glory to Christ, without even the appearance of personal gain, in money or ego? I think a great lesson in godliness is seen in the way he dealt with the issue of money etc..

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

And this is pretty much the line of thinking I'm against. The scripture I've given shows that his travel expenses including lodging and food was paid for by the preaching. Just like the disciples Jesus sent out by twos.

That you are against it doesn't mean that his primary vocation wasn't tent-maker. It is clear from his writing that his preaching did not, in face, "pay for" anything. A man who was adamantly against the preaching of the gospel for money, particularly a man with Paul's integrity, would not view any kindness done to him because of his apostleship as remuneration.

He argues in 1 Corinthians 9 that he has the right to reap material things from others because he has sown spiritual things in them, but "Nevertheless. we do not use this right, but we endure all things so that we will cause no hinderance to the gospel" [vv. 9, 10, emphasis added]. He adds this thought in the same paragraph.

1 Corinthians 9 NASB
16 For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I do not preach the gospel.
17 For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me.
​

So, enough of the nonsense. Paul was not paid for his apostleship. End of discussion.

 

[Dustoftheearth]

.
I understood the OP author to be comparing the ministry of Paul to a pastor in the church today and the support of the pastor in the church today.
I am sure I do not need to tell you what the ministry of a present day pastor may entail.

I know what many ‘present day’ pastors ‘claim’ to be their ministry, but it far from being scriptural.

Pastor/teacher is simply another gift among the many gifts that the Holy Spirit gives as He wills. As with all the other gifts it is for edifying and building up the Body of Christ. We are all given at least one gift that is used to minister in the Body.

Here is what Paul says: "For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example"

What is that example we are all called to follow, and are they any exemptions?

2Th 3:7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you,
2Th 3:8 nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we would not be a burden to any of you;
2Th 3:9 not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so that you would follow our example.

2Th 3:10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.
2Th 3:11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies.
2Th 3:12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.

 

[Deborah13]

I know what many ‘present day’ pastors ‘claim’ to be their ministry, but it far from being scriptural.

Pastor/teacher is simply another gift among the many gifts that the Holy Spirit gives as He wills. As with all the other gifts it is for edifying and building up the Body of Christ. We are all given at least one gift that is used to minister in the Body.

Here is what Paul says: "For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example"

What is that example we are all called to follow, and are they any exemptions?

2Th 3:7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you,
2Th 3:8 nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we would not be a burden to any of you;
2Th 3:9 not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so that you would follow our example.

2Th 3:10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.
2Th 3:11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies.
2Th 3:12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.

So what's your point? That pastor's should not be paid?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I understood the OP author to be comparing the ministry of Paul to a pastor in the church today and the support of the pastor in the church today.
I am sure I do not need to tell you what the ministry of a present day pastor may entail.

Paul, however, was not the equivalent of a pastor. He was an apostle, an office which no longer exists in the church, but much of the work is now being done by missionaries and church planters. That is essentially what Paul was in his service to God.

I know what many ‘present day’ pastors ‘claim’ to be their ministry, but it far from being scriptural.

Pastor/teacher is simply another gift among the many gifts that the Holy Spirit gives as He wills. As with all the other gifts it is for edifying and building up the Body of Christ. We are all given at least one gift that is used to minister in the Body.

Here is what Paul says: "For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example"

What is that example we are all called to follow, and are they any exemptions?

2Th 3:7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example, because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you,
2Th 3:8 nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we would not be a burden to any of you;
2Th 3:9 not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you, so that you would follow our example.

2Th 3:10 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either.
2Th 3:11 For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies.
2Th 3:12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.

This is in line with what I posted about Paul's own ministry and does not reflect on the pastor's office. In fact, the 1 Corinthians 9 passages I quoted in the earlier post are the basis for the pastor's office being one that is a paid position. That is because the church in which a pastor serves is already established, its membership taught the biblical principle of supporting the local church through gifts and offerings, including providing for the welfare of the pastor. Paul deliberately separates the role of the apostle-come-missionary from the role of pastor. He is saying that the spreading of the gospel should not be a burden to the people who are given the message, but that those who adhere to it, receive it in faith, and continue to grow and worship in the church that springs up in the wake of the missionary to serve the believing community does, indeed, deserve the financial support of those who continue to benefit. Clearly his pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus prove this.

 

[Deborah13]

Paul, however, was not the equivalent of a pastor. He was an apostle, an office which no longer exists in the church, but much of the work is now being done by missionaries and church planters. That is essentially what Paul was in his service to God.

As I stated in a previous post, I agree with you. Paul was not a pastor. He says somewhere that he did not baptize many Stephen and maybe a few others. It was not his ministry to be a pastor. Pastor service the congregation in a continuing copacity. Paul was an evanglist, he did appoint others at times, telling the particular church to take heed to what these ones said.
We cannot compare Paul to our pastors who should be paid for their positions.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

As I stated in a previous post, I agree with you. Paul was not a pastor. He says somewhere that he did not baptize many Stephen and maybe a few others. It was not his ministry to be a pastor. Pastor service the congregation in a continuing copacity. Paul was an evanglist, he did appoint others at times, telling the particular church to take heed to what these ones said.
We cannot compare Paul to our pastors who should be paid for their positions.

Sorry, Deb, I didn't mean to make that read like I was responding to you in opposition. I was clarifying. Shoulda said that. My bad.