Should/Do radical Christians exist?

[Adullam]

Unfortunately, I am not speaking about the church you are referring to.
I am speaking about the bride of Christ who does not need to pay for speaking and rejoicing with her bridegroom, the Christ.

Agreed!

 

[jasoncran]

felix has a point. the longer i listen too ccm its all about $$$.

what is wrong with musically talented and god raised singers who live off what he provides via offerings.

im not against all the bands on ccm and radio.

but correct theology and heartfelt desire is better over making it big in christian circles. keep in mind that when the "dove"(yuck) awards come out its not for most souls won but sales.

would jesus approve of that?

here a lyrics of a song i like but its off.

http://www.metrolyrics.com/born-again-lyrics-third-day.html

since when did god sing over us to save us? i dont understand that.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I am speaking about the bride of Christ who does not need to pay for speaking and rejoicing with her bridegroom, the Christ.

...but who needs to obey copyright laws.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Do you want a verse? Luke 10:2-11 - Told directly by Christ!

"...the worker deserves his wages." (Luke 10:7 NIV1984)

How did you miss it?

Paul refers to it too:

"17 The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18 For the Scripture says, “Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,” and “The worker deserves his wages.” (1 Tim. 5:17-18 NIV1984)

I know you will respond back with
(1Cor 9:14) In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel. (NIV)

...keep reading...

Really? Of course their publisher is a 32 billion $ company who also publish Satanic Bible and how can they publish something that will be against themselves as they need to have some sheep coverings.

(1Cor 9:14) Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel. (NKJV).

The correct translation is, those who preach the gospel should by the gospel. It means, if you preach the good news to others, first you must live by it.

Do you want proof? go a couple of verses back at v11,
(1Cor 9:11) If we have sown to you spiritual things, is it great if we shall reap your carnal things?

Paul also finished the verse like...
(1Cor 9:27) But I discipline my body and bring [it] into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.
which is exactly the same as 1Cor 9:14.

How can you ignore the whole passage that makes it abundantly clear that he is talking about making a living from the gospel?

"4 Don’t we have the right to food and drink?" (1 Cor. 9:4 NIV1984)

7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? 8 Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” Is it about oxen that God is concerned? 10 Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. 11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?

But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. 13 Don’t you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? (1 Cor. 9:7-13 NIV1984)

Neither the bishop in NT nor the prophets and priests must get paid for doing God's service:

As in 1Tim 3:4, A bishop must rule his own family well before taking care of the church - not get paid for doing it. If he is paid, he is just a hireling as in John 10:12-13, because he does not care for the sheep - if he see the wolf coming or his job is in trouble or if he is not paid.

Sounds good, but it doesn't jibe with the rest of scripture. I think your beef is with gross excess, not that ministers of the gospel have a God given right to make a living from the gospel.

Secondly, there is no such thing as a 'Pastor' leading the service after a seminary study. Pastor is nothing but 'Shepherd' or Pasturing the church and this role is given to Elders of the Church. These Elders are from the same locality who take care of the sheep and are not paid for doing this service for God. The Elders had their own work and they together with the church members met weekly as a church family. While I am not against paid Pastors (as I know some good Pastors who do a wonderful job full-time), but the concept itself is unbiblical.

We see it is clearly Biblical.

If we take the OT times, God is against priest who teach for pay and prophets who prophesy for money:
(Mic 3:11) Her heads judge for a bribe, Her priests teach for pay, And her prophets divine for money. Yet they lean on the LORD, and say, "Is not the LORD among us? No harm can come upon us."
How many of these money minded people can we see today who teach God's word for a pay? and Prophesy for money? God is against them.

It's dangerous to judge the motives of people who earn a living from the things of God. You have a right to make your own personal choices about who you will or won't accept as genuine workers of the gospel and who you consider greedy and lovers of money, but no one has the liberty to condemn. Do you know the difference between judging and condemning someone?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

felix has a point. the longer i listen too ccm its all about $$$.

what is wrong with musically talented and god raised singers who live off what he provides via offerings.

im not against all the bands on ccm and radio.

but correct theology and heartfelt desire is better over making it big in christian circles. keep in mind that when the "dove"(yuck) awards come out its not for most souls won but sales.

would jesus approve of that?

There is something definitely wrong and worldly with the whole system, but ultimatlely it's up to the individual producer and consumer of gospel merchandise to govern their own behaviors and motives in this area. Resist the temptation to condemn.

here a lyrics of a song i like but its off.

http://www.metrolyrics.com/born-again-lyrics-third-day.html

since when did god sing over us to save us? i dont understand that.

There is a scripture reference but I can't remember what it is. I'm thinking Psalm 22(?)

 

[felix]

...but who needs to obey copyright laws.

There are no copyright laws in Kingdom of Heaven.

'Copyright laws' insist that it has to be the 'original work' of the author. Also, 'derivative copyrights' are subject to the 'original author's copyright.

How can someone get everything from God through the Holy Spirit to write lyrics, preach sermons, teach gospel truths, play music, translation skills, etc and yet claim it as their own 'work' and lie to the whole world, rather than giving credit to Christ who is the 'original Author' for everything inside 'His Kingdom', by releasing all 'work' done in His Name to public domain (or a non commercial free license) for the benefit of all people?

Note: I am not talking about copyright laws for non-Christian stuff.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

There are no copyright laws in Kingdom of Heaven.

Neither are there taxes in heaven, but we are taught to abide to the laws of taxation anyway.

'Copyright laws' insist that it has to be the 'original work' of the author. Also, 'derivative copyrights' are subject to the 'original author's copyright.

How can someone get everything from God through the Holy Spirit to write lyrics, preach sermons, teach gospel truths, play music, translation skills, etc and yet claim it as their own 'work' and lie to the whole world, rather than giving credit to Christ who is the 'original Author' for everything inside 'His Kingdom', by releasing all 'work' done in His Name to public domain (or a non commercial free license) for the benefit of all people?

This goes back to what I was saying. Very few people have enough money to write, produce, and distribute music out of their own resources. That's why even Christians have to use the arena of business to share their inspired works of God. And as I've shown, there is nothing wrong with making your living from the gospel. And it's up to the individual, not you or me, how they will govern their business and how they will make a living. Don't judge where you have neither the knowledge, nor the right to pass judgment (condemn):

"11 Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?" (James 4:11-12 NIV1984)

 

[felix]

"...the worker deserves his wages." (Luke 10:7 NIV1984)

How did you miss it?

Paul refers to it too:

"17 The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. 18 For the Scripture says, “Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,†and “The worker deserves his wages.†(1 Tim. 5:17-18 NIV1984)




...keep reading...

How can you ignore the whole passage that makes it abundantly clear that he is talking about making a living from the gospel?

[/I]"4 Don’t we have the right to food and drink?" (1 Cor. 9:4 NIV1984)

7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? 8 Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn’t the Law say the same thing? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.†Is it about oxen that God is concerned? 10 Surely he says this for us, doesn’t he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. 11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?

But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. 13 Don’t you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? (1 Cor. 9:7-13 NIV1984)

So, please tell me what the wages are in Luke 10. Why don't you still understand that Jesus doesn't what the worker to carry money bag?

Paul wasn't talking about getting paid or receiving any wages for what he is doing. Did you read v6,
Or [is it] only Barnabas and I [who] have no right to refrain from working?

He is questioning if he had no rights to work elsewhere - not getting wages.

(1Tim 5:18) For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer [is] worthy of his wages."

This is one of the most misunderstood verse ever for most of them who preach are paid, so they take this to justify themselves.

The verse before (v17) and the verse after (v19) speaks about giving honor to elders and not accuse an elder unless there is 2-3 witness. The Elder is going God's work for God. 'Muzzle an ox' is stopping it from eating while it is working. So, what is the food and what is the work of God? John 6:29, John 4:34 - People believing in Christ and doing His will. Paul is writing about not to silence the Elder by not honoring or accusing him (when writing to Timothy). This verse has nothing to do with the Elder making a living. The next verse in other location after referring to 'muzzle an ox' immediately speaking (1Cor 9:11) about not expecting to reaping material things. How can you consider 'Muzzle an ox' to making a living when it is referring not to silence the Elder when he is working for God?

In fact, the entire chapter of 1 Cor 9 speaks about not expecting anything worldly nor supporting anything like making a living.

Today's hirelings had not only twisted this to make it worldly but also preach it as worldly to justify their work.

Sounds good, but it doesn't jibe with the rest of scripture. I think your beef is with gross excess, not that ministers of the gospel have a God given right to make a living from the gospel.

Earning from gospel work is not a God given right. If it is a God given right, then Christ must have done it. Neither Christ, nor John the baptist and none of the apostles and disciples of Christ ever lived their living from doing gospel work.

We see it is clearly Biblical.

Nope. It's unbiblical and we don't see it clearly in Bible. The wages for gospel work must be according to how Christ defines in Luke 10.

It's dangerous to judge the motives of people who earn a living from the things of God. You have a right to make your own personal choices about who you will or won't accept as genuine workers of the gospel and who you consider greedy and lovers of money, but no one has the liberty to condemn. Do you know the difference between judging and condemning someone?

If I had to follow Christ, I must take a whip and drive ALL merchants from the Temple of God exactly as Christ did - referred as His Body - which is nothing but the true bride of Christ, His Church.

 

[felix]

Neither are there taxes in heaven, but we are taught to abide to the laws of taxation anyway.

(Matt 22:17-21) "Tell us, therefore, what do You think? Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not? But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, "Why do you test Me, [you] hypocrites? Show Me the tax money." So they brought Him a denarius. And He said to them, "Whose image and inscription [is] this? They said to Him, "Caesar's." And He said to them, "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

I tell you the same thing: Who does those songs, sermons, teachings belong to? Are they from God or men?

If they are from men, then obey men as they sets the rules for how to use their work. If it is from God, then obey God as in John 4:38.

(John 4:38) I sent you to reap that for which you have not labored; others have labored, and you have entered into their labors."

This goes back to what I was saying. Very few people have enough money to write, produce, and distribute music out of their own resources. That's why even Christians have to use the arena of business to share their inspired works of God. And as I've shown, there is nothing wrong with making your living from the gospel. And it's up to the individual, not you or me, how they will govern their business and how they will make a living. Don't judge where you have neither the knowledge, nor the right to pass judgment (condemn):

"11 Brothers, do not slander one another. Anyone who speaks against his brother or judges him speaks against the law and judges it. When you judge the law, you are not keeping it, but sitting in judgment on it. 12 There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you—who are you to judge your neighbor?" (James 4:11-12 NIV1984)

(Isa 66:9) Shall I bring to the time of birth, and not cause delivery?" says the LORD. "Shall I who cause delivery shut up the womb?" says your God.

If it is from the Lord, then He will provide what is required in it's right time. The Lord who I worship is Yahweh-Yireh which means 'the LORD will provide'. He is not a God to provide anything incomplete to us to do His Work, then ask us to do business or get donations to get the rest. If it is from God, then He will send the right people and resources required to accomplish what He desires at the right time.
(Eccl 3:11a) He has made everything beautiful in its time.

Of course I have heard many quoting James 4:11-12 along with Matt 7:1 because they doesn't like anyone one telling them what they do is wrong and to be corrected. It's not judging but warning people who error for correction - the role of watchman.

There is a difference between judging vs warning for correction. When someone judges, he does not care about the person but provides his opinion about him usually to another person (like a gossip). When someone warns, he cares about that person and speaks what is wrong in him directly to him, so that he can correct it.

 

[jasoncran]

There is something definitely wrong and worldly with the whole system, but ultimatlely it's up to the individual producer and consumer of gospel merchandise to govern their own behaviors and motives in this area. Resist the temptation to condemn.




There is a scripture reference but I can't remember what it is. I'm thinking Psalm 22(?)

ok. did i say all were bad, but when a friend tells me her daugheter went to the dove awards and wanted to be a christian musician and decides not to and insteads sings a local church and is the worship leader. its says a lot.

she said that she saw a gay christian musician section.was appalled at what the women wore.

im not a legalistic , god told me to guard my heart when it came to music. i dont listen to secular music at all.

 

[Classik]

You don't listen to secular music at all.
That is between you and God, Jasoncran. Secular! secular! secular! That would of course include poetry, jazz (instrumental), dance etc. Not too easy.

Not to interrupt - just a thought

 

[Elijah674]

I have heard some Christians say: "I am a radical for Jesus". That's sorta religious extremism!

A friend of mine (now late) who was a musician had an album. One of the songs says: Radical For Jesus.


Is it right to be a radical Christian (in the context of extremism or whatever they have in mind for saying that)?

Hi, 'i' have been around a long time Born Again/wise. I not only LOVE my Lord, but Love the one sent back to uplift Him (God Christ).. God the Holy Soirit, and that leaves Jehovah God whom the Holy Spirit Inspired that when we spiritually see Christ, we SEE GOD JEHOVAH!

OK: How does the Godhead discribe LOVE?? (liberal or radical?? + me??)
Your question has gotten much response!;) So much so that I am not going to read through them all.
But had any ever heard of the CHURCH talk of a new converts FIRST LOVE?? And do you think that this LOVE is to become less rather than to increase?????

So lets just post the Word of Christ up for that answer, and all can answer your question for [theirself] for if.. 'they even exist'?

Rev. 3
[14] And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;[15] I know thy works, that thou art neither [[cold nor hot]]: I would thou wert cold or hot.
(we see that being COLD on the outside of a church is having one easier reached by the Holy Spirit than these sickly lukewarm loving ones below!)

[16] So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
[17] Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

And does this sound like any Christians of today??

This is the whole of the Laodicean last church. Interesting that we see that there seems to be just NO WAY that you could get a negative truthful answer from them?? For they say & teach that they [have need of NOTHING!] And NAKED?? That surely is talking of having on the Wedding Garment which is the Rightousness of the Master which Adam lost after he sinned.
Truely STAYING in Christ of Rom. 8:1 & being 'LED' into FULL 'LOVING OBEDIENT' MATURITY! ibid 14 (see Nah. 1:9)

OK: How would you think that they would 'CLASS' their/selves.. as radical??

--Elijah

 

[jasoncran]

You don't listen to secular music at all.
That is between you and God, Jasoncran. Secular! secular! secular! That would of course include poetry, jazz (instrumental), dance etc. Not too easy.

Not to interrupt - just a thought

i dont listen to jazz, poetry? no dont care for it.

nor do i care for any modern dancing. most of its all about sex.

not all dancing is bad.

 

[Classik]

I really enjoy this response (the entire post), honestly. It's a brand new perspective.

OK: How does the Godhead discribe LOVE?? (liberal or radical?? me??)
Your question has gotten much response!;) So much so that I am not going to read through them all.
But had any ever heard of the CHURCH talk of a new converts FIRST LOVE?? And do you think that this LOVE is to become less rather than to increase?????

The love shouldn't die. This love should grow stronger and stronger - but it should be directed:

I remember all the funnny things we did as new converts. To us, Christ was going to come the next minute. So We were over-zealous!:D We were Jesus freaks, kind of.

We used to fast almost everyday, from 6AM to 6PM. We were starving, and I knew. And all day we'd think about food. The minute hand of the clock seemed completely dead. I was kind of, 'What the heck is holding the minute hand? Move fast - I starve.'

We were fresh students in highschool, and usually students need to feed before they leave for school; we never bothered about breakfast. 'We really Starved', and it affected our learning negatively. We could not concentrate - but we believed God was very pleased with us (of course he didn't think we were stupid - He understood our zeal).

There were occasions where we missed classes or refused to read. We moved from one fellowship to another. We converted all classrooms into a fellowship ground. We preached at all times...

Pure love!!! One thing we lacked was knowledge, although we were zealous for HIS Work.

But I wonder if I still have that craze in me today. I wish that mania had remained in me. (although I have direction today. One thing I seem to lack is that madness for the things of GOD)



Elijah, the love should grow stronger and healthier every second. As we mature the Holy Spirit directs us aright. I don't need to starve foolishly today to convince myself 'I'm serving the Lord'. (And during those fasts we never took water). God was pleased with us anyway.
I was (or maybe still am) a radical. But whatever I am today, it should depend on Rom 8:1
Thank you for this quote Rom 8:1

 

[Classik]

Radicalness for Jesus is normally seen in the young immature new believers...and so this zeal itself is seen as immature. Over time they usually become as dead as the others...as in numb to spiritual things. But is numbness really maturity?

Then there are others.... ;)

And the best thing to do is to encourage them in the Lord. Direct them aright. The worst attempt is to condemn them. It usually has negative impact!


Is Rom 8:1 behind it?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

So, please tell me what the wages are in Luke 10. Why don't you still understand that Jesus doesn't what the worker to carry money bag?

Perhaps because of this maybe?

"35 Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?â€

“Nothing,†they answered.

36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." (Luke 22:35-36 NIV1984)

It's so obvious he is indeed talking about material provision...and later changed his counsel to the Apostles to carry a purse...and also a bag! You're going to have to do some serious rationalizing to make it say what you want it to say.

Paul wasn't talking about getting paid or receiving any wages for what he is doing. Did you read v6,
Or [is it] only Barnabas and I [who] have no right to refrain from working?

He is questioning if he had no rights to work elsewhere - not getting wages.

Are you just choosing to ignore the plain verses I highlighted from 1 Cor. 9 that show the passage is in fact very much about material compensation for ministering the gospel?

(1Tim 5:18) For the Scripture says, "You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain," and, "The laborer [is] worthy of his wages."

This is one of the most misunderstood verse ever for most of them who preach are paid, so they take this to justify themselves.

But I've shown that when Jesus used the phrase '...worthy of his wages' it clearly means material provision.

The verse before (v17) and the verse after (v19) speaks about giving honor to elders and not accuse an elder unless there is 2-3 witness. The Elder is going God's work for God. 'Muzzle an ox' is stopping it from eating while it is working. So, what is the food and what is the work of God? John 6:29, John 4:34 - People believing in Christ and doing His will. Paul is writing about not to silence the Elder by not honoring or accusing him (when writing to Timothy). This verse has nothing to do with the Elder making a living. The next verse in other location after referring to 'muzzle an ox' immediately speaking (1Cor 9:11) about not expecting to reaping material things. How can you consider 'Muzzle an ox' to making a living when it is referring not to silence the Elder when he is working for God?

You're confusing Paul's quick order of various commands to Timothy. There's no reason to strain to make each fit the next as if the chapter is about any one particular subject exclusively.

In fact, the entire chapter of 1 Cor 9 speaks about not expecting anything worldly nor supporting anything like making a living.

It is exactly the opposite as I showed you from the rest of the chapter.

Today's hirelings had not only twisted this to make it worldly but also preach it as worldly to justify their work.

I think it's obvious you are twisting to nurse a grudge against those who abuse their privilege to make a living from the gospel. It's just another example of 'throw the baby out with the bath water' theology. Like tongues.

Earning from gospel work is not a God given right. If it is a God given right, then Christ must have done it. Neither Christ, nor John the baptist and none of the apostles and disciples of Christ ever lived their living from doing gospel work.

Then show us in the Bible how they did make their living, okay?

Nope. It's unbiblical and we don't see it clearly in Bible. The wages for gospel work must be according to how Christ defines in Luke 10.

Which I showed to be actual, material payment.

If I had to follow Christ, I must take a whip and drive ALL merchants from the Temple of God exactly as Christ did - referred as His Body - which is nothing but the true bride of Christ, His Church.

What exactly do you think Christ was upset about? I think you'll be surprised that it was not that they were selling livestock to travelers to the Temple, for that is what sojourners were supposed to do who could not carry their own livestock/ crops to the place of worship. Did you know this? That being true, we know Christ was concerned about something else. If anyone can judge hearts it's Jesus Christ, not little ol me and you.

 

[felix]

Perhaps because of this maybe?

"35 Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?â€

“Nothing,†they answered.

36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." (Luke 22:35-36 NIV1984)

It's so obvious he is indeed talking about material provision...and later changed his counsel to the Apostles to carry a purse...and also a bag! You're going to have to do some serious rationalizing to make it say what you want it to say.

You are taking out of context. This incident is not about Jesus sending His disciples to preach the good news but be prepared for His crucifixion and the prophecy about Him to be fulfilled.

The very next verse says why Jesus told that:
(Luke 22:37) "For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.' For the things concerning Me have an end."

Are you going to preach the gospel or to your church with swords? or is your pastor doing his service with swords? Why do you take the money bag and yet ignore the sword from the same stuff?

Are you just choosing to ignore the plain verses I highlighted from 1 Cor. 9 that show the passage is in fact very much about material compensation for ministering the gospel?

Neither I ignored any nor it speaks about material compensation for ministering the gospel. I think I missed to address this verse in my previous post

(1Cor 9:13-14) Do you not know that those who minister the holy things eat [of the things] of the temple, and those who serve at the altar partake of [the offerings of] the altar? Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.

This is not speaking about anyone ministering the gospel making a living from it.

Partake of the alter is excellently explained by Paul Himself in the next chapter.

(1Cor 10:17-21) For we, [though] many, are one bread [and] one body; for we all partake of that one bread. Observe Israel after the flesh: Are not those who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? What am I saying then? That an idol is anything, or what is offered to idols is anything? Rather, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the Lord's table and of the table of demons.

As explained in v20, partake in the altar is compared to having fellowship with the Lord. This is why the next verse in 1Cor 9:14 says plainly that those who preach the gospel should live by what they preach, which is also the closing verse of that chapter.

But I've shown that when Jesus used the phrase '...worthy of his wages' it clearly means material provision.

Of course it does mean material provision. Neither I denied it. However, the way it had to be attained is outlined in Luke 10. He clearly instructed NOT to take a money bag. I still have great respect for preachers who just receive lunch/food from a church member for preaching and never receive any money. These are true people who had understood and follow exactly how Christ instructed.

You're confusing Paul's quick order of various commands to Timothy. There's no reason to strain to make each fit the next as if the chapter is about any one particular subject exclusively.

No. I am not confusing but you are just ignoring the actual truth in it. The previous and the verse after is very clear on what the subject is about. There is no reason to believe 1 Tim 5:18 is about making a living but it clearly explains to us not to silence the Elder while he is laboring for God.

I think it's obvious you are twisting to nurse a grudge against those who abuse their privilege to make a living from the gospel. It's just another example of 'throw the baby out with the bath water' theology. Like tongues.

Am I twisting?

(John 10:12-13) "But a hireling, [he who is] not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep.

I did not used the word hireling but Jesus did.

The Greek word translated means a wage-worker.

G3411 μισθωτός misthotos (mis-tho-tos')
1. a wage-worker

God Himself says, a hireling does not care about the sheep. How about stop paying all the paid pastors for a year and let us see how many will remain doing their job?

Then show us in the Bible how they did make their living, okay?

Jesus was a carpenter (Mark 6:3)
Paul worked as a tentmaker (Acts 18:3)

What exactly do you think Christ was upset about? I think you'll be surprised that it was not that they were selling livestock to travelers to the Temple, for that is what sojourners were supposed to do who could not carry their own livestock/ crops to the place of worship. Did you know this? That being true, we know Christ was concerned about something else. If anyone can judge hearts it's Jesus Christ, not little ol me and you.

But the Jesus Christ that I am referring to cared about the Temple of God and was extremely angry to even take a whip and drive the merchants from the Temple.

Take these things away! Do not make My Father's house a house of merchandise! Then His disciples remembered that it was written, "Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up. (John 2:16-17)

Church is the body of Christ - (note that I am not referring any building) but believers. Do not make this body of Christ, a spiritual house built with living stones as a house of merchandise.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You are taking out of context. This incident is not about Jesus sending His disciples to preach the good news but be prepared for His crucifixion and the prophecy about Him to be fulfilled.

The very next verse says why Jesus told that:
(Luke 22:37) "For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: 'And He was numbered with the transgressors.' For the things concerning Me have an end."

Are you going to preach the gospel or to your church with swords? or is your pastor doing his service with swords? Why do you take the money bag and yet ignore the sword from the same stuff?

How do you keep missing it?

verse 35..."When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" (Luke 22:35 NIV1984)

See? Jesus' instructions to them were most certainly about being materially provided for while they minister the gospel.

Neither I ignored any nor it speaks about material compensation for ministering the gospel.

How are you missing this?

"11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?" (1 Cor. 9: NIV1984)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jesus was a carpenter (Mark 6:3)

We know that Jesus was probably a carpenter by trade. What I want you to show me is he worked for his own material provisions during his three year ministry. If I'm not mistaken, the Bible speaks of women providing his material needs.

Paul worked as a tentmaker (Acts 18:3)

Paul himself tells us he did not use his right to be materially provided for, but chose to forgo that right and provide for himself. This is what prompted his whole teaching on how ministers of the gospel are to be compensated for ministering the gospel in the first place.

Do not make this body of Christ, a spiritual house built with living stones as a house of merchandise.

Whether it be the literal or spiritual house of God, that is for each individual to judge in himself and decide where the boundaries should be in that regard. Don't declare guilt (condemn) where you have neither the knowledge nor the authority to do so.

 

[felix]

How do you keep missing it?

verse 35..."When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" (Luke 22:35 NIV1984)

See? Jesus' instructions to them were most certainly about being materially provided for while they minister the gospel.

You are missing the whole point in the verse. They lacked nothing inspite of not asking for money or donations. They were provided by God when they require anything to do His Work.

When someone requires some help or in need when doing God's Work, they need to ask God and not people for money and donations. The God will send His people to help them in right time. People who rely on money for doing God's work, simply don't trust God and have faith in Him that He will provide for all our needs.

How are you missing this?

"11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?" (1 Cor. 9: NIV1984)

'right of support?' - oh.. sorry, I forgot you are reading from the publishers of satanic bible and the publishers of 'joy of gay sex' which is controlled by Rupert Murdoch who wants SOFA and PIPA and also a Saudi prince who is a Muslim who does not even believe Christ as God.

(1Cor 9:11) If we to you the spiritual things did sow--great [is it] if we your fleshly things do reap? (YLT)
(Gal 6:8), For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption, but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life.
As in Gal 6:8, sowing Spiritual things means preaching good works that leads to eternal life. fleshly things means that leads to destruction. This verse is not speaking about 'material' things but 'fleshly' things.

(1Cor 9:12) if others do partake of the authority over you--not we more? but we did not use this authority, but all things we bear, that we may give no hindrance to the good news of the Christ. (YLT)
To partake is to have fellowship (as I explained in previous posts). Even the greek word [G3348 μετέχω metecho] means 'share' or 'participate' NOT 'support' as the NIV states.
The authority over them which Paul writes in his letters is explained by himself in his second letter to the same people.
(2Cor 13:10) Therefore I write these things being absent, lest being present I should use sharpness, according to the authority which the Lord has given me for edification and not for destruction.

This authority is not getting money or making a living, but using sharp words and rebuke for their fleshy things.

I wonder how much a translation can corrupt people.