"But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they
shall give ACCOUNT thereof in the day of judgment." Matt.12:36

"Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take ACCOUNT of his servants." Matt.18:23

"After a long time the Lord of those servants cometh, and RECKONETH with them." Matt.25:19

"And he called him and said unto him, "How is it that I hear this of
thee? Give ACCOUNT of thy stewardship, for thou mayest no longer be
steward." Luke 16:2

"So then every one of us shall give ACCOUNT of himself to God." Rom.14:12

"Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in His sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with whom we HAVE TO DO." Heb.4:13

"Obey them which have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give ACCOUNT, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." Heb.13:17

"The Gentiles...shall give ACCOUNT to Him that is ready to judge the
quick and the dead." I Peter 4:5

OBSERVATIONS: While, on the human plane, we are to OBEY people whom God has given to have authourity over us:
-children to parents
-citizens to kings and governors
-Christians to elders
-employees to employers ... yet

(1)Accountability in scripture is ALWAYS VERTICAL (Godward). It is
NEVER HORIZONTAL (manward).
(2)Accountability in scripture ALWAYS HAS TO DO WITH STEWARDSHIP
WHICH IS RENDERED TO GOD (accounting for responsibilities or
resources which have been entrusted to one by God.)It NEVER HAS
TO DO WITH STEWARDSHIP WHICH IS RENDERED TO MEN(accounting for
responsibilities or resources which have been entrusted to one by
other men.)
(3) Accountability in scripture ALWAYS INVOLVES:
a. GOD-GIVEN DIRECTION for one's life or service,
b. GOD-GIVEN EVALUATION of one's life or service.
(NEVER MEN'S DIRECTION OR EVALUATION of one's life or service.)

For these reasons confusion and conflicts of interest have always plagued Christians whenever they have considered themselves accountable to parents, the state, church leaders, employers, or donors regarding the ministries or the exercise of their spiritual gifts which have been given by God!

Brothers and Sisters, Have you ever found yourself bound with a conflict of interest in your service to God because somebody "held you accountable" to them? How would a clear understanding of the scriptures above deliver you from that bondage? To whom would you then be fully accountable? In what ways would ministry in a house church, which recognized this truth, differ from ministry in one which did not? I'd really appreciate your input on this vital subject!

I was taught for years that I had to be accountable to the pastor of my church, the elders of my assembly, the board of the mission with which I worked etc. But inevitably I found that I had a conflict of interests! I would see directives from God in His word that went contrary to the programs, policies, and philosopies of the pastor, the elders or the board!

But when I went to scripture (see the texts in my post above) I discovered that my accountability is always to God (vertical) and never to men (horizontal). Thus one of the biggest problems in institutional AND in house churches is the unwillingness of believers to be accountable to God!!!

Being accountable involves two things: (1)Going to a person to receive and fulfill an assignment and (2)going back to that person for evaluation of how well one's assignment was fulfilled. The only things that really matter in the Christian life are hearing HIS direction and receiving His "Well done!" What other people expect of us or how they praise us or persecute us is of no real import! Every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Romans 14:12

Those who want to "hold others accountable" and those who refuse to "be accountable to God" are the ones who need to have their thinking adjusted to come in line with scripture!

Does this help? Is this idea a radical departure from what you have normally heard on this issue? Is this idea a radical departure from scriptural teaching on accountability?

For centuries we have been deceived and beguiled by a false and satanicly inspired distinction between "clergy" and "laity". As a direct result most of us swallowed the concept of a similar distinction between "sacred work" and "secular work". This necessitated a distinction similar but not synonymous to clergy/laity, which is called "full-time Christian workers" versus "part-time Christian workers". The former we were taught were to be "supported" by salaries, stipends, tithes and offerings while the latter were to be strictly "volunteers", unpaid, unloved, unknown!

I would be interested to hear from others who have been troubled by this deceptive but very prevalent mind set regarding "Christian ministry". What does scripture teach about how the needs of Christians are to be met? Should we charge for our services? Who should determine what a Christian servant is "worth"? Who is responsible to reimburse a Christian servant for his labors: the ones whom he/she serves? OR the one who assigns the tasks?

Trust this might open up a lively discussion, but may I ask that each one who posts a response be prepared to justify their position with statements of N.T. scripture?

Your postings bless me much. How true that thoughts determine actions. Your point is well made. Yes, everything gets affected. This thread could get mighty big. :-D

"As a man thinks in his heart - so is he."

Some people are better than their beliefs - others have very accurate doctrines but make no effort to live them out. Thank God that He is patient and uses us despite our deficiencies. Renew our minds, Oh Lord !

I have been looking at this one for some time now, and I think I have come to somewhat different conclusions - even though I admire your stand on this issue as being courageous. What you are saying, needs to be said. For it's only in completely opening up this 'can of worms' that we can come to honest conclusions and really make our decisions based on faith. I believe those who work at the altar should be supported by the altar, as it says,

1 Cor 9:12-14,
"But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. 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? In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel."

What Paul is saying is that this is the way it has always been, and is in fact, 'what the Lord commanded'. Paul is reiterating it as a command that still stands in his day. In other words, it didn't automatically disappear after the crucifixion. But Paul is not excercising his 'right' to this support - not because he wants to set an example for the church to follow, but rather so that he would not cause the slightest hindrance of the gospel of Christ.

So it was commanded by the Lord that those who work at the altar be supported by the altar - yet not as a salary, as has been suggested - rather by gifts that is freely given according to one's ability to give, and/or the needs of the worker. The donations were to be spread out to any and all that were volunteers and also to any that were in need, such as the widows who had no means of support. In this way all needs would be met. As it states in,

Acts 2:45,
"Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need."

Or in Acts 4:34-35,
"There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need."

And this would not be a wage per se, as it is clear that Paul did not work for a wage. He worked by faith,

Rom 4:3-5,
"What does the Scripture say? 'Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.'

Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness."

Clearly they are talking about the difference between wages and gifts. A salary would be a set amount given at regular intervals to the worker - so it would be considered an 'obligation', and not a gift. But for those who wish to work by faith - these are credited as righteousness. Does this meaning no income at all? No. It just means that the income would come in the same way that it was received by Abraham, or Paul, or even David who entered the temple and took the bread which was illegal for him to take.

It all works if people are willing to give of their income, for their own sakes. And to support those who work by faith. If they are not willing, the Lord makes them favourably disposed towards you regardless. This also is proven throughout the scriptures. He still does this today.

***So who does asign the tasks? Who is the boss? Why, the Master of course. Who do we serve? Jesus, our king & God our heavenly Father! Does a servant charge those he serves at the command of his Master? Does a servant determine his own worth or does his master? If we are to serve each other, how can we charge each other? If we serve the poor, how can we charge them?

The word says:

Matt. 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels, and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Luke 6:38 Give, and it shall be given unto you;...For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

Matt. 10:7-13 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal...raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give. provide neither gold, nor silver nor brass in your purses,...for the workman is worthy of his meat...

***Who pays the bills? Who owns the wealth? Who shall reward us? Our Father does.

Matt. 6:8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.

Matt. 6:11 Give us this day our daily bread.

Matt. 7:9-11 ...your Father which is in heaven gives good things to them that ask him?

Matt. 10:42 And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of the little ones a cup of cold water...shall in no wise lose his reward.

Luke 12:32-33 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, ...

Philip. 4:19 But my God shall supply all your needs according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.

Col. 3:24 Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.

Rev. 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

***What are we to do?

Matt. 6:28-34 And why take ye thought for raiment?... if God so clothe the grass...shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?... But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you...

Luke 12:28-37 ...Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom...For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also...

Luke 10:2-9 ...the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest, ...I send you forth as lambs among wolves. Carry neither purse, or scrip, nor shoes: and salute no man by the way. And into whatsoever house ye enter,...eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire...

Gal. 6:1-10...let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not. As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

1 Peter 5:2-3 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.

***Should we ever give to one another?

2 Cor. 8:14 But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:

Philip. 4:15-20 Now ye Philippians...sent once and again unto my necessity...I have all, and abound: I am full, having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you,... God shall supply all your needs according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus...

Matt. 25:34-46 Then shall the king say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom...I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat:...thirsty, and ye gave me drink:...a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me:...sick, and ye visited me:...inprison and ye came unto me,...

Acts 20:32-35 An now, brethren, I commend you to God,...these hands have ministered unto my necessities,...It is more blessed to give than to receive.

Ephes. 4:27-28 ...let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.

Luke 11:41 ... give alms of such things as ye have;...

Matt. 6:1-6 Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them; otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do...thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

1 Cor. 9:6-14 if we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? ...we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

***Are we to seek money or are we to minister?

1 Cor. 3:8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.

1 Cor 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built there upon, he shall receive a reward.

1 Cor. 9:17-18 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward:...What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.

Acts 18: 1-5 Paul...because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. Ane he reaoned in the synagogue every sabbath,...

Acts 20:33-35 I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. Ye, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necesities, and to them that were with me. I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.

Acts 28:30 And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,

2 Thes. 3:6-10 Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day that we might not be charageable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves and ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

Proverbs 23:23 Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction,and understanding.

Matt. 19:21-24 ...If thou wilt be perfect, go & sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me...

James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless & widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

John 10:12-13 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, ...careth not for the sheep.

Job 7:1-2... a servant earnestly desireth the shadow, and as an hireling looketh for the reward of his work.

If we begin to worry about getting reimbursed for our time and gifts to others, we are not laboring for the gospel out of love; but returning to the bondage of the old Roman priestly system. We should work to provide for our own and be willing to share what we can as we see the need, be it the word, time, food, clothes, money, gifts, etc. The Lord asigns the tasks and gives each of us certain opportunities to give in someway. Remember the widow and the mite or Dorcus's coats. It is giving from a heart of love that counts. It is better to give than to receive. Don't charge for what you have freely received. Buy the truth and sell it not. Follow the Lord's leading in your life and he will reward.

your servant in Christ,

Where in the world did you find such radical instructions for the financing of the Lord's work by the Lord's servants??? Are you trying to rock the boat or something? Charging and paying "works"!!! Why talk about all this GIVING stuff?
There sure aren't many bucks to be made that way!! You should get with it in the 21st century!!!

I hope you know I'm writing "tongue in cheek"!!

Actually, I thank the Lord for every line you've written above! For far too long we have allowed religious systems and religious leaders who wished to line their own pockets at the expense of others to expalin away theses simple scriptural truths. Thank you for reminding us so forcefully of the weight of N.T. evidence that there is for servants of God to serve freely and in absolute dependence on their faithful, promise keeping, miracle-working God!

Thank you, sister, for your contribution to this very necessary and oft neglected subject among God's people!

BUT, if we believe that some saints are assigned to "live by faith" and others are not, we do not understand New Covenant Christian living! Living by faith does not exempt one from manual labour. If any one lived by faith, the apostle Paul did, but he consistently labored with his hands not only for his own needs but also for those of them that were with him. Acts 20:33-35

There is no evidence whatsoever in the N.T. that God ever intended 2 classes of believers, i.e.:
-one class which lives by faith and another which lives by sight,
-one class which receives gifts and one class which are paid wages,
-one class which serves the Lord and one class which serves men,
-one class which preach the gospel and one class which listens,

Rather, ALL believers are to live by faith, receive gifts, serve the Lord, and preach the Gospel! NOT ALL are evangelists, but all have good news to tell to others.

You say that we do not have the right to "expect or require that their needs be met by any particular man, woman, or group of people" - but I think you are trying to apply your personal judgment to it to in order to avoid acting on faith.

According to Paul in this passage, it was certainly his "right" to expect support from these people because it was the 'Lord's command'. But Paul was breaking the command, by his own admission. Paul was sinning. And though it might be forgiveable for the reasons he did it, it wasn't Paul's 'right' to second-guess the Lord. It's as if Paul thought he knew better that the Master himself, and that he (the Lord) hadn't thought of everything. Paul was going too far.

What might seem like a selfish act on your part (ie - when you ask for support from those the Lord instructs you to ask) is actually an act of kindness, because yours and their obedient responses result in life for both of you. To ignore these instructions means that things will at first work inefficiently, and finally, end in death for both. It will be like something plugging up the veins and arteries within the Body because the Lord's commands were second-guessed. We need to both give and to receive. To 'not' expect, when we are told to do so, is to be disobedient.

And when did I say that I believed 'some saints are ASSIGNED to "live by faith" and others not'(emphasis mine)? I did not. Neither did I say that God 'intended it'. So this portion of your response, is irrelevant at this point.

"There is no evidence whatsoever in the N.T. that God ever intended 2 classes of believers, i.e.:
-one class which lives by faith and another which lives by sight,
-one class which receives gifts and one class which are paid wages,
-one class which serves the Lord and one class which serves men,
-one class which preach the gospel and one class which listens,"

As below, some will 'choose' to work for love, while others will choose to work for money regardless of the Lord's commands.

A mother works in her home to look after her children, do the grocery shopping, make meals, do laundry, help her kids with homework, be there as an emotional support for her husband and her children - all these things may be inclusive of 'manual labour' that a mother is responsible for in God's eyes. There may be manual, financial, emotional, spiritual tasks assigned - all types of work, and all types of giving of herself, so she must be prepared for whatever comes up.

But she isn't paid an hourly wage, and she doesn't 'charge' for her work. She works for love - for God IS Love. It's the classic, traditional example which Paul does not make mention of in this passage.

In some cases, the man may be assigned to do this work for his family, but most are not willing as women have been in past to give so willingly of themselves for loves' sake. Men have traditionally preferred to work outside of the home for money. If both the man and the woman are working for God(love), then both are supported by the Lord, usually through other people. I know it can be done, however, but it usually isn't - not because God 'intended' it this way, but because people choose it this way.

I agree with your last statement - we are to live by faith, and not be disobedient to the Lord's commands.

I've never before heard the suggestion that Paul was disobedient to the Lord in what he expressed in I Cor.9!

You said,"According to Paul in this passage, it was certainly his "right" to expect support from these people because it was the 'Lord's command'. But Paul was breaking the command, by his own admission. Paul was sinning. And though it might be forgiveable for the reasons he did it, it wasn't Paul's 'right' to second-guess the Lord. It's as if Paul thought he knew better that the Master himself, and that he (the Lord) hadn't thought of everything. Paul was going too far."

It is certainly true that an ox should be allowed to feed from the corn that it treads out in the mill, and it is certainly right for a plowman and a reaper to benefit from the harvest. In like manner it was right for O.T. priests to eat of the offerrings that were brought to the altar. In the same way it is right for those who preach the Gospel to live of the Gospel.

Paul does not deny that, nor does he refuse those who willingly gave to meet his needs! (Phil.4:15,16) What he DID refuse to do was to DEMAND, or REQUIRE the saints to meet his needs! He refused to CHARGE for preaching the Gospel!
(I Cor.9:18) It is this text which clearly links CHARGING with ABUSE OF POWER in the Gospel!

Sister, you then responded to my comments: "What might seem like a selfish act on your part (ie - when you ask for support from those the Lord instructs you to ask) is actually an act of kindness, because yours and their obedient responses result in life for both of you. To ignore these instructions means that things will at first work inefficiently, and finally, end in death for both. It will be like something plugging up the veins and arteries within the Body because the Lord's commands were second-guessed. We need to both give and to receive. To 'not' expect, when we are told to do so, is to be disobedient."

I agree wholeheartedly that we need to be willing to both give and receive. We have tried to be generous givers but we have so often been on the receiving end of generous giving that far exceeded our own!

You speak above about "asking others from those whom the Lord instructs you to ask". Can you show N.T. scriptures where the Lord Jesus taught his disciples to go and ASK others to meet their needs? Can you show any apostles who did this? Can you show any apostolic indtructions that such should be done? I am not aware of any such scriptures so if there are, you can certainly help me here!

I believe that such would be contrary to what Paul taught in Acts 20:33-35 and Phil.4:6,7 (as two examples).

Will appreciate any help you can give me on this one.

Your brother in Christ,
Bruce

I've taken a few quotes from your post to address them.

"It is certainly true that an ox should be allowed to feed from the corn that it treads out in the mill, and it is certainly right for a plowman and a reaper to benefit from the harvest. In like manner it was right for O.T. priests to eat of the offerrings that were brought to the altar. In the same way it is right for those who preach the Gospel to live of the Gospel."

~~~~~~~~~~~Ok, so you agree with this. But do you also agree with Jesus that David was right to take the bread from the priests even though it was illegal to do so? (Matt 12:3-4) Do you not realize that the Lord vindicates his servants if they are following his directions?

Now combine these with what Paul is saying in Romans 4:1-6, about living by faith. Abraham and David were two people that he refers to that lived this way. And how did they receive their incomes? Abraham received his wealth from the local kings, because the Lord inspired (or perhaps pressured) them into giving to him - he didn't work for a wage, yet he took care of his own household. And David took the food off the altar from the priests, without so much as asking! He also did not work for a wage, yet the Lord vindicated his actions afterwards. Abraham, David, and Paul were all earning their living (or their righteousness) apart from works. But they WERE being obedient to God, and that's the pivitol point.

"Paul does not deny that, nor does he refuse those who willingly gave to meet his needs! (Phil.4:15,16) What he DID refuse to do was to DEMAND, or REQUIRE the saints to meet his needs! He refused to CHARGE for preaching the Gospel!
(I Cor.9:18) It is this text which clearly links CHARGING with ABUSE OF POWER in the Gospel!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Certainly I agree that it can be abused, and Paul refused to charge for his work - but this was not the case with David. What makes it a sin to 'demand' it is when you have not been working for God in truth, and/or the Lord has not given you instructions to ask for it. Asking for wages or salaries would not be working by faith no matter which job we take on. But Paul taught the churches about the necessity for giving and receiving. There was however only one church, 'that shared with him in the beginning' (Phil 4:15). Paul had obviously taught all the churches the same. As they learned, so they changed.

In the verses you refer to (Phil 4:15-16), Paul is looking to credit to their account, yet by not excersising his 'rights' to receive support he had certainly suffered (v 14).

What Paul taught in Acts 20:33-35 was for the sake of the 'weak'. Still, even though it is obvious that Paul worked, there is nothing to indicate that he worked for wages - which would have been against what he taught elsewhere. He would have been working with the people he stayed with in order to earn his keep and prove to them that he did not covet their belongings. But also, some of his colleagues would bring him neccessities from time to time - so that he could carry on the work of the gospel.

From the beginning Jesus taught his disciples not to bring any purse or extra tunic, for the worker is worth his wage. And what were the wages in those days? Simply food and lodging. Sending money to other areas came along with acknowledgment that those who had given of their spiritual knowledge from afar were also worthy of their support - when there were poor there. It was encumbent on the rich to give regardless, and it was incumbent on the idle to learn to work with their hands.

Paul was very clear when it came to people who had wealth. In this case he told Timothy to 'command' that they be generous and willing to share. (1 Tim 6:17-19) But with whom should they share? With other rich people? Of course not. They were to be generous and willing to share with the poor in order to put themselves as the same level. And wouldn't this then have to include the apostles, and disciples who had given up everything for the sake of the gospel? They had been promised by Jesus himself that they would 'receive back a hundred times as much in this present age, and with them persecutions'.(Mk 10:30). In this way the rich were building a foundation for eternal life! So how could they refuse? The overall goal was financial equality. For as Paul states elsewhere, "those who had much should not have too much, and those that had little should not have too little". (2 Cor 8:13-15)

But for those who were not willing to share, do you think the Lord would treat them the same in the end? Do you not think that the Lord would vindicate the ones that now needed to receive? The rich would have lost their salvation if they refused to cooperate! And it certainly was good news for the poor, for now, if the rich were truly 'saved', they would be giving up their wealth, just as Jesus and the disciples had.

But he wasn't idle. He just didn't hold a secular job. He knew he would receive enough to live on whenever he needed it, plus enough to feed the thousands that followed him. That's the level of faith he had. However, not all can rise to that level of faith when they first become Christian. They still need other work to fill up their time - until they learned to hear and obey the Spirit's instructions daily.

But for Paul, coming across people that were 'weak', there was something else that was needed. Many needed to learn how first not to be idle, and how to work with their hands in order to always have something to share with others.

So ask yourself, are you a weak Christian? Are the other Christians you connect with weak? Teach the rich to give because their salvation depends on it, and teach them all to volunteer willingly, keeping them all busy. The more they fill up their time with good works, the better the Lord will support them. However it will be through other people and likely with persecution. The Lord will teach them if they will not listen to you.

"You speak above about "asking others from those whom the Lord instructs you to ask". Can you show N.T. scriptures where the Lord Jesus taught his disciples to go and ASK others to meet their needs? Can you show any apostles who did this? Can you show any apostolic indtructions that such should be done? I am not aware of any such scriptures so if there are, you can certainly help me here!"

I hope I have answered your query somewhat above, but further, there are cases where it is obvious that the Holy Spirit is giving the disciples specific directions - which are not written of in the Bible in their exact words. (Acts 16:7 for instance) And of course Gal 5:16 tells us that we must be led by the Spirit in order to avoid sinning, so this would mean daily direction. You must have experienced this already. So when the Lord tells you to do something specific, do you immediately run to your Bible to see where it is written there? Not if you know his voice, and trust him.

Diane

You say that Abraham drew support from "local kings"! Would you care to specify what text(s) you have in mind?

Where does the Lord ever instruct His servants to ask others to meet their financial needs???

You suggest that Paul did not work for wages and I agree with you. But He did do manual labor of value to other people, he gave his service (tent making) and also received what others gave to him. In this way he met his own needs and the needs of those who were with him. Acts 20:34

Diane, you also seem to indicate that salvation is dependent upon and can even be lost by poor stewardship of one's wealth or by one's unwillingness to give!
That is not the salvation provided by my Saviour! There is nothing that I can add to His finished work that will secure my eternal destiny in Christ, nor anything that I might fail to do that will diminish it!

The fact remains that there is no N.T. text which would ever teach any believer to ask, or require, or command another to give to meet one's own need!

"Yes, David took shewbread from the tabernacle. If you can find the tabernacle today and take some shewbread I would not quarrel with you. But to take this as justification for "clergy" or "pastors" or "elders" or any other "N.T.minister" taking/charging/asking financial support of other believers is going way beyond the scope of scripture!"

~~~~~~~~If a person is only taking what they need, in order to eat, or to pay for neccessities, then they would still be doing the same thing that David did. And Jesus would vindicate them.

However, I do NOT justify clergy taking from the donations as they do today for the sake of their salaries and wages, and in this we are in agreement. For these people's aim is not 'equality' with the other priests and ministers in their membership. And Bruce, we are ALL priests and ministers. I agree with a lot of the concepts on this website - that there should be no clergy/laity division. No-one has more right to the donations than any other. It should be based on need.

"You say that Abraham drew support from "local kings"! Would you care to specify what text(s) you have in mind?"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Pharoah 'treated Abram well for Sarai's sake, and Abram acquired sheep and cattle, male and female donkeys, menservants and maidservants, and camels.' But even when Pharoah found out the truth that Sarai was Abram's wife, he still sent him off 'with everything he had.' (Gen 12:16-20) Reading through to Gen 13:1-2 you will also see that Abram had become very wealthy.

After this, the Lord came to Abram and promised to give him and all his offspring 'all the land that he could see.' (Gen 13:15-17) It was land that the Israelites had to 'take' from the people that were living there. That was their part of the work. They didn't need to ask for the land if the Lord had given it to them. They had to take it.

Abimeliech, king of Gerar, later had a dream warning him not to touch Sarah, lest he die. So he brought back Sarah to Abraham and gave him sheep and cattle and male and female slaves - 'to cover the offence against her and all who were with her - they were completely vindicated'. (Gen 20:1-16) In this way Abraham prayed for Abimelech, and he and his household were healed. (vs 17-18)

"Where does the Lord ever instruct His servants to ask others to meet their financial needs???"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Giving and receiving was a major part of that 'good news' for the poor that Jesus had been sent to preach. It was in fact the first thing that Jesus mentioned when he started his ministry in his hometown. (Lk 4:18) And Paul had obviously not neglected to tell all the churches about it. This was his way of 'asking' for his share, though he did not want to excersise his "rights" in this for fear of hindering the rest of the Gospel. But even though he had asked, there was only one church that was willing. If he hadn't asked them he would not have said, 'not one church shared with him in the matter of giving and receiving, except you only'. (Phil 4:14-16) They had been told what they should do through his preaching, and possibly asked outright. Either way, they were aware of what was required of them.

"You suggest that Paul did not work for wages and I agree with you. But He did do manual labor of value to other people, he gave his service (tent making) and also received what others gave to him. In this way he met his own needs and the needs of those who were with him. Acts 20:34"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~For the sake of the weak he did this, yes. (Acts 20:35) But you ignored my question. Are you and your colleagues weak?

Paul was following the guidance of the Holy Spirit on a daily basis, doing the work that was outlined for him, which happened to include manual labour. Abraham and David had other duties that the Spirit asked of them which did not necessarily include manual labour. Mothers have other duties again which the Spirit asks of them which may include manual labour, for which they receive support through other individuals - usually and hopefully their husbands. You have ignored this example. Each person has their own work that the Spirit guides them to do. Working to support oneself is not the way it was supposed to be. Rather working for God or for love was the way it was supposed to be, for everyone.

"Diane, you also seem to indicate that salvation is dependent upon and can even be lost by poor stewardship of one's wealth or by one's unwillingness to give!
That is not the salvation provided by my Saviour! There is nothing that I can add to His finished work that will secure my eternal destiny in Christ, nor anything that I might fail to do that will diminish it!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I don't believe in salvation by works Bruce. But if it was a 'command' that the rich should be willing to share, and through this (sharing - for faith without actions is dead) they were laying a foundation for real life - do you think Jesus will reward those that are not obedient in the same way as those who are? And without a foundation for life what have they got? Are you saying that the Lord plays favourites?

"The fact remains that there is no N.T. text which would ever teach any believer to ask, or require, or command another to give to meet one's own need!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~No? Then what is it saying in 1 Tim 6:17-19? Was Timothy supposed to command them to be willing to share with everyone but himself? Clearly Paul sees this as something more than just a simple 'asking' for he uses a much stronger word for it. It was a requirement on the part of the rich.

It is obvious with the story about David that the Lord approves of someone not just asking for, for 'taking' what he/she needs. Yet NOT out of selfishness or greed as you have obviously been witness to. And NOT as a 'charge' or demand for a salary, but rather when it is neccessary, so that you can eat and buy things that you need for yourself and for those in your care. Anybody has a right to this according to the Spirit's direction, so that no one has too much or too little, as I pointed out. If you are not following the Spirit's voice, you are not in that position. But you have avoided addressing this part of my post also.

"...seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will begiven to you as well." (Matt 6:33) The way to solve the problem is not to get rid of God's system, but to get rid of the abusers of it.

Diane

We do not have this same fear today. The gospel fills the airwaves as it is. Therefore we no longer have to set this example as Paul did at that time.

Diane

Re. Abraham: See Gen.13:21-24. He even refused GIFTS which the Kings offered him, lest any of them would say they had made him rich!

Certainly Abraham prospered and became very wealthy, but it was never because he needed assistance and asked or demanded contributions from others to meet his needs!!!!

re. Paul's teaching about working to meet his own needs and the needs of those who were with him, and then using his own example as the pattern to be carried on by elders (Acts 20:33-35), you say that he simply did this because of the weak (as if this would only be in exceptional cases) and then you ask me if I and my coleages are weak? Yes, we are all weak! When God calls a wife a "weaker vessel" (I Peter 3:7)it only infers that the husband is a "weak vessel" NOT a strong one!!!

That the strong should support the weak is a principle that runs all through scripture! Parents are to lay up for children, not children for parents. (II Cor.12:14) The strong are to bear the infirmities of the weak. Rom.15:1 The strong are to support the weak. I Thess.5:14. This is the rule, NOT the exception!

Further, you ask, "But if it was a 'command' that the rich should be willing to share, and through this (sharing - for faith without actions is dead) they were laying a foundation for real life - do you think Jesus will reward those that are not obedient in the same way as those who are? And without a foundation for life what have they got? Are you saying that the Lord plays favourites?"

Rewards for faithfulness are clearly distinct from any possibility of one losing their salvation! Some will be saved, "so as by fire" and lose their reward because what they built was done in disobedience, but they will be saved!

Regarding the instructions to the rich in I Tim. 6:17-19, I could never see this as Paul or Timothy charging, demanding, or asking the rich to support themselves! Rather they were urging such to be ready to voluntarily recognize needs where ever they saw them and to be willing to use their wealth to meet such needs. There is a world of difference between teaching general principles about meeting needs and telling specific people to "meet MY needs"!!!

Perhaps I'm not understandinmg you properly, Diane. How do you handle these matters with rich people in your circles of acquaintance? Do you ask them for specific help? Donations? etc for your needs in the work you believe God has given you?

In your last post, you said, in part: "Many of them would have used Paul's 'requiring of support' as an excuse to accuse him of coveting their wealth. Thus it would have ruined his spreading the gospel even further up the road.
We do not have this same fear today. The gospel fills the airwaves as it is. Therefore we no longer have to set this example as Paul did at that time. "

I would say we have that very same situation full blown today!!! 95% of preachers and "ministries" on the airwaves (radio and TV) can rightly be charged with covetting the wealth of their audiences! Rather than following the advice of the Lord Jesus, "Freely ye have received, freely give." They follow the maxim, "Fully we have been charged, so you fully pay!" Untold damage is done to the cause of Christ because of this very thing!!

Rather than looking to the one whom they claim has assigned them their task, they look for their support to the ones they have been commanded to minister to!

All servants of God are to have their eye upon Him alone, not only for their assignments and service, but also for the provision of all of their needs!
See Phil.4:6,7 and Ps.123:1,2 etc

Your servant for Jesus' sake,
Bruce

"Please explain how you understand David's taking of the shewbread to be a pattern for Christians today to take from other Christians for their needs. I don't seem to be getting the connection. Or maybe more practically, if this is your pattern, how do you do it?"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~David's case is a pattern that we should take what we need from the donations which have already been presented to God - however, since everybody knew that this was supposed to be food for the priests, we may well look at it as though he was taking food directly from them also. Most Christians I know donate somewhere for the sake of the Gospel.

To take from another Christian directly, the Lord has his ways of getting that person to give when you ask. Most would rather give than suffer the discipline. Remember the story of the fig tree? Yet it is also encumbent on the student to 'share all good things with his/her teacher'. All Christians should be aware of these teachings.

"Re. Abraham: See Gen.13:21-24. He even refused GIFTS which the Kings offered him, lest any of them would say they had made him rich!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~In the one case, I agree. Abraham could see through his motivation.

Certainly Abraham prospered and became very wealthy, but it was never because he needed assistance and asked or demanded contributions from others to meet his needs!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~He certainly lived off other people's lands did he not? And did the Lord not give those lands to him and his offspring? The Israelites simply took from the people in that case. Still, if you read my orginal wording, Abraham drew his support from them - that is, he lived partially off what those people who gave to him in that land. Even if you and I don't think Abraham 'needed' it, obviously God thought he did.

"Paul's teaching about working to meet his own needs and the needs of those who were with him, and then using his own example as the pattern to be carried on by elders (Acts 20:33-35), you say that he simply did this because of the weak (as if this would only be in exceptional cases)"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Well...that IS what it says.

and then you ask me if I and my coleages are weak? Yes, we are all weak! When God calls a wife a "weaker vessel" (I Peter 3:7)it only infers that the husband is a "weak vessel" NOT a strong one!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Ok, now you're changing the subject. Paul meant it that those churches were weak in the respect that they had not yet learned that it was more blessed to give than to receive. (v 35) When I ask you if you are weak, I mean, 'are you weak in this same way?' I am presuming that you are not, but I still don't know how you would answer that question. Are you being evasive?

"That the strong should support the weak is a principle that runs all through scripture! Parents are to lay up for children, not children for parents. (II Cor.12:14) The strong are to bear the infirmities of the weak. Rom.15:1 The strong are to support the weak. I Thess.5:14. This is the rule, NOT the exception!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~That's right. And the strong financially should be generous with the financial poor.

"Rewards for faithfulness are clearly distinct from any possibility of one losing their salvation! Some will be saved, "so as by fire" and lose their reward because what they built was done in disobedience, but they will be saved!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Faith without action is dead, is it not? So then where is it that the Lord will say, 'I never knew you.'?

"Regarding the instructions to the rich in I Tim. 6:17-19, I could never see this as Paul or Timothy charging, demanding, or asking the rich to support themselves! "

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~If they were poor, why not? Do you think they would tell the rich to share with other rich people? What is more, they taught that every student must share all good things with his teacher, so this would include their excess in material wealth as well.

"Rather they were urging such to be ready to voluntarily recognize needs where ever they saw them and to be willing to use their wealth to meet such needs. There is a world of difference between teaching general principles about meeting needs and telling specific people to "meet MY needs"!!!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~And that would certainly have included themselves when necessary wouldn't it? But I told you already, Paul had asked ALL the churches, yet there was only one that shared with him in the matter of giving and receiving. If he hadn't asked for his own needs to be met, he would not have said, "not one church shared with me...except you only." He would never have accused them like this if he hadn't.

"Perhaps I'm not understandinmg you properly, Diane. How do you handle these matters with rich people in your circles of acquaintance?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~How do I handle it? I already told you - the way the Spirit directs me to.

"Do you ask them for specific help? "

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Sometimes.

"Donations? etc for your needs in the work you believe God has given you?"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Exactly. When the Spirit directs me to. But it took me awhile to learn it. Jesus is the author of my faith.

"I would say we have that very same situation full blown today!!! 95% of preachers and "ministries" on the airwaves (radio and TV) can rightly be charged with covetting the wealth of their audiences! Rather than following the advice of the Lord Jesus, "Freely ye have received, freely give." They follow the maxim, "Fully we have been charged, so you fully pay!" Untold damage is done to the cause of Christ because of this very thing!!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I agree that there is fault - but also there is fault in the way some people 'give' into their ministries. I cannot blame them entirely. But I think the bigger fault lies in the fact that they tend to retain more and more for themselves. They have fogotten that they are supposed to become like the people they are preaching to. How can they preach to the poor when they're dressed like a million bucks? They are not humbling themselves to be just like them as Paul did in order to win a few.

"Rather than looking to the one whom they claim has assigned them their task, they look for their support to the ones they have been commanded to minister to!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~All true. That's why they should be waiting to see who should be asked specifically from the Holy Spirit, instead of asking everybody in a blanket call, rich and poor alike. Also not everyone receives benefit from their teaching, so neither should these be asked.

Diane

Regarding Abraham, I never knew that he received gifts from other kings or nations. Where would we find that? God certainly promised to give him lands which were presently occupied by other peoples. They did not "give" their lands, God gave them to Abraham!

You say, "Paul meant it that those churches were weak in the respect that they had not yet learned that it was more blessed to give than to receive. (v 35) When I ask you if you are weak, I mean, 'are you weak in this same way?' I am presuming that you are not, but I still don't know how you would answer that question. Are you being evasive?"
No, Diane, I'm not trying to be evasive. I understand the "weak" here to simply be those who are in need (here in a financial sense). I don't think the text indicates they were "weak " in the sense of "unfamiliar with the principle: it is more blessed to give than to receive"!

I wholeheartedly agree with you that the financially strong should be generous with the financially poor (on the condition that the "poor" is not in that condition as a result of unwillingness to work with his own hands! II Thess.3:6-12) "If any would not work, neither should he eat!" Most soup kitchens totally disregard this scriptural principle!!!

In response to my comments on salvation not being by works, you said, "Faith without action is dead, is it not? So then where is it that the Lord will say, 'I never knew you.'?"
That text is found in Matthew 7:23. Those whom Christ "never knew" are those who profess but never were truly saved! Of those who are His sheep, the Lord Jesus clearly says, "My sheep hear my voice and they follow me, and I give untio them eternal life anf they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." John 10:27,28
Of one who is His sheep today, and is known by him, the Lord Jesus could never, at some future date say, "I never knew you!"

Regarding I Tim.6:17-19 I said, "I could never see this as Paul or Timothy charging, demanding, or asking the rich to support themselves! " and you responded, "If they were poor, why not? "
For the very reason that a servant looks TO HIS MASTER TO SUPPLY HIS NEEDS, NOT THOSE WHOM HE SERVES! Ps.123:1,2; He makes his requests known to His God, not to men! Phil.4:6,7

Further, you say, "What is more, they taught that every student must share all good things with his teacher, so this would include their excess in material wealth as well." I think you are referring to Galatians 6:6
That is certainly a scriptural principle. But neither the Lord Jesus, Paul, nor any other apostle ever asked specific people to give specificly to them!!! Nor did they require gifts to be given to themselves! Do you do this Diane? Do you teach Christians to whom you minister to give to you??? How do they respond? generously, willingly or grudgingly? II Cor.9:7 says, "As a man purposeth in his heart, so let him give, not grudgingly or of necessity, for God loveth a cheerful giver."

I enjoy giving when God puts someone or a particular need upon my heart, but whenever anyone speaks their own need to others hoping for donations, I can never give to such! They have their eyes looking in the wrong direction!
I wrote: "There is a world of difference between teaching general principles about meeting needs and telling specific people to "meet MY needs"!!!"
To this you responded: "And that would certainly have included themselves when necessary wouldn't it? But I told you already, Paul had asked ALL the churches, yet there was only one that shared with him in the matter of giving and receiving. If he hadn't asked for his own needs to be met, he would not have said, "not one church shared with me...except you only." He would never have accused them like this if he hadn't. "

Diane I am not aware of any place in the N.T. where Paul asked any church for donations! He taught scriptural principles of giving, but to require donations for his ministry would have denied his principle of making the Gospel without charge! I Cor.9:18
Diane, if you ever asked those you minister to for financial assistance, could they then say of you that you ministered to them "without charge"?? I don't think so!

"I'm trying to get a practical "handle" on what you are expressing. In your own ministry, from what "donations" would you feel free to take? Does your house church gathering take a collection? Do you take from that collection for your needs? Do others? Who decides how much or who is eligible to do so?"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I still attend a regular church at this point, and no, I would not feel comfortable taking from the donations there. But it is my job to show them in what ways they should change. I don't imagine that David felt comfortable taking from the altar either at first. I have only a couple of people presently under my umbrella, and only one that meets with me regularly. This one has agreed to tithe in my direction, in acknowledgment of my teaching, but I do not take donations other than this. I don't have to ask everyone, only the ones the Lord tells me to, which will then be a good arrangement for them also.

The one I am currently working with understands that if she hopes to have her own ministry one day she has to learn how to do this herself, for she will also be requiring support for her work in ministry. Remember, we are all supposed to be priests and ministers, but there are still some who refuse to go live by faith. These prefer to charge for their work, or to work for wages - receiving their money as an obligation, rather than a gift. You are included in this group at present, and do not seem to want to budge from your position. Yet it is not an act of faith.

There is a point you can reach where you know you have the authority in Christ to require a person's financial support - because he tells you that you have that authority! This is in fact what Paul was referring to when he said he had the 'right' to their support, even though he decided not to excersise it. Paul had the right to require it from them, if he chose to.

Asking for a gift after you have done a good work for the Lord is not 'charging' them. Not if you are doing it willingly, and would do it no matter whether the Lord tells you to ask for something or not.

If everything is working right, and people are mature in Christ, then these rights can be excersised fully. Hopefully it is given willing and with a joyful heart, but if not, then I still believe we will be dependant on this system in future. How long will it take the Body of Christ to reach maturity? Soon I hope!

In answer to your question, yes, people have certainly given to me at my request, with varying responses - regularly, in spurts, long-term, short-term - in all ways. You reap what you sow. But the soup kitchens you refer to are not doing something wrong simply because they don't address the issue of those people not working. This would mean they are judging them, and this would not only be wrong to do so, but it is not something they would want others to do to them. And who knows why they are in the position they are in? Didn't Jesus and the disciples eat from other people's cornfields? Yet in doing this they was depending on the system that the Lord outlined for the poor. Would you have judged him also? You see, if you remain faithful the system works well.

"In response to my comments on salvation not being by works, you said, "Faith without action is dead, is it not? So then where is it that the Lord will say, 'I never knew you.'?"
That text is found in Matthew 7:23. Those whom Christ "never knew" are those who profess but never were truly saved!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~And what way do you think the Lord will know that they were never truly 'saved'? One of the ways will be in the evidence of their unwillingness to follow up their instructions (or commands) with actions. If they were willing to give, they would do so. It's fairly simple to see this. But maybe not if you are one of those that is deceived by riches.

"I enjoy giving when God puts someone or a particular need upon my heart, but whenever anyone speaks their own need to others hoping for donations, I can never give to such! They have their eyes looking in the wrong direction!
I wrote: "There is a world of difference between teaching general principles about meeting needs and telling specific people to "meet MY needs"!!!""

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Then I feel you have quite a bit to learn, because the trick is to work for God, yet not to allow people to see that you are in need. So it is impossible to know when some people are in need, and they have to ask you! Are you willing to give to anybody who asks you as it says in Matthew 5:42? Or do you play the role of judge and decide not to give because you don't believe they deserve it? This is not treating others as you would have them treat you.

I guess this is what you do then.

I have to say it one more time. Paul had in fact asked for his own needs to be met by ALL the churches, but only one church 'shared with ME in this matter'. If he had been asking for the sake of others, then he would have said that they weren't sharing with 'THEM'. (Phil 4:15) - and then he goes on to speak of the further gifts this church had sent to him 'when he was in need.'(v 16)

It wasn't wrong for Paul to be in need, and to ask for himself.

Let me use a practical example: Just recently a family, to which we had had the privilege of ministering, gave us a very generous gift of money. Now if I had said, in my letter of thanks to them, that they had been the only family who had ministered to us in this way....would that have indicated that we had asked them, and every other family to which we had ministered, for financial assitance??? Absolutely not! We have never asked anyone to assist us financially, but have made our requests known to God. He has proven Himself very faithful! Other people do not need to know our needs for God to speak to their hearts and move them to give!

By the way, I do not charge for any service or work of mine and have not for the past two years. For 16 years I have done sharpening of tools. Have specialized in sharpening and installing bread slicer blades for bakeries. But 2 years ago I shut down the business in which I considered myself "self-employed" and instead continued to offer the very same service as a servant of the Lord. He is now my "boss" and so the business must function according to His principles. I take directions and assignments from Him and He (not the ones I serve) is responsible to meet my needs. I no longer write invoices or keep records of "accounts reciveable". Bakeries receive my services without cost or obligation. I tell them up front that the service is free. If they want to give something, they are at liberty to evaluate the service for what they feel it is worth to them and according to what they are able and willing to give.

Some have been quite willing to receive the service freely and I continue to serve them. Others give approximately what I had formerly charged and a few are most generous! I write receipts for any who request such. Over the last two years I have spent far less time than I ever did at what might be called "gainful employment". I have had far more time available to minister to the Lord's people in spiritual ways than ever before, and yet our needs have been abundantly met. Our God is faithful and we praise His Name!

The Lord has also given me other assignments such as freely doing yard work and home repairs for a widow. She has wanted to "pay" me, but the lord has indicated very clearly to me that I was not to receive anything from her. She has told me that she has given what she would have given me to other Christians or ministries which she supports. Nothing thrills me more! You see, members of our physical body freely minister to other members without ever charging the members to which they minister. All freely minister and all freely receive exactly what each one needs. The head sees to that! In exactly the same way, ministry in the Body of Christ is to be given freely as we have freely received! And the Head of the Body of Christ does the same for the members of His Body!

Diane, I am very curious about the one lady whom you referred to as "being under your umbrella" whom you have taught to tithe and whose tithes are directed to you.

Can you explain what you mean by "being under your umbrella"? Is this a scriptural concept? What exactly is "your umbrella" and how would someone "come under" it? It seems that you anticipate that more and more other people will and should "come under your umbrella " in the future and that they should then "direct their tithes to you" as well.

How would you ever teach N.T. believers who are under the New Covenant any New Covenant principles that would lead them to follow an Old Covenant practice (tithing) which was designed by God to support a distinctive Old Covenant priesthood? I think you have acknowledged the N.Testament doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, so I am really confused by your approach to these matters. Do you tithe? To what sort of people do you direct your tithes? Can you explain for me how you would teach these things from scripture?

"It seems to me (from my limitted frame of reference) that you are assuming far too much from Philippians 4! How does Paul's statement to the Philippian saints, that they are the only church which has ministered to him in the matter of giving and receiving, indicate that he had asked them or any other churches to help him financially????"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I'll grant you that it may need some spiritual discernment, but it's in the way he words his statement. He points out that only one church of all the churches he dealt with 'shared with me in this matter of giving and receiving'. If these people hadn't understood that this is what was required of them - to share with him in particular, as opposed to just sharing in general - then he could hardly have had cause to say that they hadn't shared with HIM.

If you don't ask, you can hardly blame them for not doing it. But Paul's whole tone implies that they did know what was expected of them, and that is why he puts it in just this way. He wouldn't have placed this stigma on them otherwise. Whether he specifically asked or simply made it understood through his teaching, it still works out the same - they understood what was required of them, and chose not to cooperate. Elsewhere he apologizes to some of them for having wronged them for NOT excersising his rights.

All scriptures combined, it was the exception not to excersise his rights, for it was the Lord's command that he should receive his living this way. Now I think I have explained it about as clearly as I can.

"Let me use a practical example: Just recently a family, to which we had had the privilege of ministering, gave us a very generous gift of money. Now if I had said, in my letter of thanks to them, that they had been the only family who had ministered to us in this way....would that have indicated that we had asked them, and every other family to which we had ministered, for financial assitance???"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~If you did it in order to teach future generations how to both handle things, as well as not, yes it would. But it depends on your reason for doing it. Paul was speaking at the prompting of the Holy Spirit - he was both praising the Philipian church, and pointing out the hardship he had suffered because others had not cooperated. If the Spirit had prompted you to tell this family the same thing, then there would be good reason for it also, as in Paul's case. As you do not suggest that there would be any reason for telling in your case, it truely is hypothetical.

"Other people do not need to know our needs for God to speak to their hearts and move them to give!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Good for you! Are you presuming that all people are the same as you? Some people will only give when somebody asks them directly. Other people are not moved well by the Spirit, they ignore him much of the time, even when they do see the need and are told. What the Spirit has been pointing out to me is that the system must not be denied even if people are stubborn - their lives may depend on it in future.

"We have never asked anyone to assist us financially, but have made our requests known to God. He has proven Himself very faithful! Other people do not need to know our needs for God to speak to their hearts and move them to give!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I don't necessarily tell them my needs, but I go to God just as you do, and then the Spirit tells me to ask someone else. Not that this is always the way. There are surprise gifts also. But he doesn't want me to be afraid to do anything he asks of me. I think you've gotten the impression that I am asking without being directed to do so, even though I have repeatedly told you that this is what I do.

"I tell them up front that the service is free. If they want to give something, they are at liberty to evaluate the service for what they feel it is worth to them and according to what they are able and willing to give."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~So do you only tell them that the service is free? Or do you tell them the second part also - that they are at liberty to evaluate the service for what they feel it is worth to them and according to what they are able and willing to give?

"Over the last two years I have spent far less time than I ever did at what might be called "gainful employment". I have had far more time available to minister to the Lord's people in spiritual ways than ever before, and yet our needs have been abundantly met. Our God is faithful and we praise His Name!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Have you forgotten about the story about the mother at home? The traditional housewife has never been 'gainfully employed'. And she ministers to her family all the time.

"Can you explain what you mean by "being under your umbrella"? Is this a scriptural concept? What exactly is "your umbrella" and how would someone "come under" it? It seems that you anticipate that more and more other people will and should "come under your umbrella " in the future and that they should then "direct their tithes to you" as well."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~For lack of a better term, she is 'under my spiritual authority'. We are meeting daily (or at least communicating by phone) for mutual edification and study. I am teaching her. She is not actually tithing though, this was just the start to get back into the groove. She hadn't been attending any sort of church for the past two years, and is actually giving whatever amount the Spirit tells her to - as he does me. The Spirit is training both of us. Others will come in future, yes.

"How would you ever teach N.T. believers who are under the New Covenant any New Covenant principles that would lead them to follow an Old Covenant practice (tithing) which was designed by God to support a distinctive Old Covenant priesthood? I think you have acknowledged the N.Testament doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, so I am really confused by your approach to these matters. Do you tithe?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Tithing was a term that we used at first in order to break the ice. As above, we do not consider it a rule in the sense you think here. We had to start somewhere, and this word was simply familiar to both of us - she had the faith for it. I do not 'teach' it.

"To what sort of people do you direct your tithes? Can you explain for me how you would teach these things from scripture?"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I give wherever the Spirit tells me to, as well as the amount - the church I attend, the ladies group within that church, individual people, especially to the poor, and some ministries - but these are changing all the time. The Spirit's aim is to make me the 'heart' of the Body. As you can imagine the importance of the heart in any body, this will be a massive enterprise, and something from every part of the Body will come to me as all join in.

My lady friend and I are both familiar with being directed by the Spirit, and trust each other in that respect. We count him as having more sway on our lives than scripture, but as I said, there is a great deal of trust. The Holy Spirit is as a third person at our meetings. She has gotten this way partially as a result of not being able to read English as easily as most people do - English is not her first language. Though we haven't seen the Lord in bodily form in our meetings as yet (as the disciples did), he does have a physical body in the earth at this time.

Diane