Brother David:

I am not certain, but I think I found out how to reply directly to your post.  I feel like I have House Church Network training wheels on.

Over the course of the history of Christianity, Church / Fellowship financing and Leadership salaries is one of the hottest topics in our Faith.

It was a hot topic beginning right there in the 1st century.  

While we have Matthew 10, where Jesus sends his disciples out to minister as, "they received for free, give for free," we also have on the other side of that very same issue Luke 8, where we can see that Jesus received financial gifts, see Luke 8:3.  In Luke 8:3, if you read all of the 52-something English translations, you can see the translators tripping over themselves trying to get it just right.  

The problem there with Luke 8:3 is this Koine Greek word, ὑπαρχόντων, or for the Romans, huparch'ontoun.  It is somewhat difficult to translate because in the Koine it is somewhat euphemistic.  In a sense, it is like our phase "make a living."  We can ask someone, "How do you make a living?"  Now, if we were from Japan and trying to figure out this language a reasonable answer might be, "Let's see, I inhale, then I exhale, then I inhale again, and repeat that is how I "make + living."   Literally, however, huparch'ontoun, or  ὑπαρχόντων, is the idea, " ... of one's resources," the ladies' "means," which is another English word that if you speak Chinese or Japanese makes absolutely no sense.  Ie., do you have the "means" to take all of us out for pizza?  Notice there that even in modern American English we have softer, more polite ways of asking someone if they have "MONEY."  That is what Luke is doing, but he writes like this in several places.  Luke:  From his grammar, syntax, and manner we can see in his original he is very, very well educated both in letters and in manners.   Mark's Greek is more working class.

Thus, Luke doesn't say directly that these women gave Jesus silver and gold.  It is too blunt, too crass, and indirect speech was key to understanding this culture and this language.  Yet, that is exactly what he meant.  This is a culture that is very different from ours.  This ὑπαρχόντων is a softer word for silver and gold, sort of like our "means" or "that which we have from how we make a living."  That one, good luck translating that one into Japanese.  You cannot do it literally, not exactly. 

So, Luke is telling us that yes, Jesus received donations of money for his ministry.  We have a choice.  We can throw Luke out, or take that phrase at the author's word.  Related to that, we have Matthew 10:8, where at the end of the phrase as traditionally carved out and translated, we have "freely give" as you have freely been given.  This is clearly stating, do not ask for a fee.

If we put Matthew 10 to Luke 8 into the flower mixer and turn the mixer on, what we can pour out later is a solution to this challenge.  Moreover, it is reflective of all of our relationships with Christians.  I can freely give from my means, after all if we read Luke 8, we can see that Jesus didn't say no, you can't give me money.  However, we can also see from Matthew 10, that we cannot say, "I'll come teach for you if you pay me."   In first Corinthians, 1 Thessalonians, and Acts, Paul is on that side of the coin.  1 Timothy, I must say, I cannot comment on it.  The teaching is too "hard" for here.

We do, however, have a good picture of 1st century Christian worship, and on how they dealt with money, pastors, and church funding.  It is a document that is held to be one of the oldest known Christian documents.  It is called the "Didache," the Teaching.  It is a 1st century Fellowship Handbook.  It was found behind a wall in the late 19th century in Istanbul.  Almost all of us agree that it is in 1st century Greek.  Chapter 12-13 cover those who charge money for teaching. 

This is a fair English translation.   https://davidmathiraj.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/didache-01.pdf

From chapter 12:
But if he desires to settle among you and has a trade, let him work for his bread. But if he has no trade, you should provide for him according to your own discretion. In no way should anyone live among you unemployed as a Christian. And if he is not willing to do this, he is making a trade of Christ. Beware of this kind of person.

Here is a key point.  This word, it has so much Greek seasoning that you can smell it.  See "trade of Christ"?  These Greek there is very, very unique.  Here goes:

Do you know the word Christ?

Do you know the word for "Emporium"?  (Lol!)

Now, a little back story, there are two words in Koine for market, agora and emporium.  What is the difference, and there is one.

The agora is the town market.  The emporium is the global trade center.  If you read a 1st century trader's manual, you will see the trade ports along the coast of Egypt, Africa, the Red Sea, and even India, marked not as "agora," but as "emporium."  

So, what our Christian brothers said about these types, they called them, χριστέμπρός, χριστ = Christ, and έμπρός = emporium-traders.

It has to have been the biggest insult in the Christian world.  That word is ... so derogatory that it is hilarious.  

Yes, we can give, but no, we cannot haggle the price.  Yes, we can receive gifts, but no, we cannot set fees. 

See the Didache, chapter 12, Matthew 10, Luke 8, Acts 20:34, I Cor 4:11-12, and 1 Thes 2:9-10.

---------------------------
One of the main differences, if not the difference, is that Armenian Christianity has a different "fine text."  You will never see one of us on a street corner poking holes in the clouds with our finger telling people what "God says in the Bible."  To most of us, that is blasphemy.  It is blasphemy because it assumes that we know the mind of God.  

What we can say, and do say, are things like this, "What the Spirit is saying to me through this is .... X."  I might also say something like "The Spirit teaches me to apply this passage in this way in my life."  Period, full stop.

The Armenian monks broke from Rome around 400 AD.  Books on theology will tell you that it was because of an argument about the essential nature of Christ.  That is the other side telling our side of the story.  It is part of the truth, but not the truth.

Around 400 AD Rome handed us a list of rules and beliefs, and said, "This is it, sign the papers."  We wouldn't sign, and we wouldn't sign because we do not know the mind of God, we only know what the Spirit shows us.  We wouldn't sign, and Rome had a fit.

My Christian friends often ask me, "Hey, come to our service and listen to pastor so-and-so."  What they don't know is we "can't do that."  When the pastor says, "God is telling us here that .... X."   What we can say is, "In my life, I feel that the Spirit is telling me to apply this to my life as X."

So, while I shared how I feel the Spirit leads me to apply the Didache chap 12, Matt 10, Luke 8, Acts 20:34, and 1 Thes 2:9-10, that is merely, and only, what I feel how the Spirit guides me to apply that in my life.  Is that the "Word" of God?  To answer that, I would have to assume that I can completely "know" the mind of God.  

I claim Matt 23, and thus I am but a mere Christian brother.  

God bless all of you.