Third, what about the needs of the apostles and church leaders? There is no indication that the apostles received regular offerings from the church, such as a monthly salary. Paul occasionally received help from the church in Philippi or from others. To meet his own needs and those of his companions, Paul also worked making tents. For elders who lead well and work hard at preaching and teaching, they should be “worthy of double honor,” which can be interpreted as financial support (I Timothy 5:17). However, there is still no indication of them receiving regular financial support from the church.

Hello my brother, will you please slow down? You have us drinking from a fire hose.

Haha. Just kidding of course... We appreciate your words as we do all who participate.

The first usage of the oft-quoted phrase worthy or hire (or reward) looks to be Luke 10. Let's quote that passage here and confirm that it had nothing to do with permanent salaries for local leaders. But rather for those temporarily on the move for the sake of the Good News:

After this the Lord appointed seventy others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go. 2 He told them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field. 3 Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. 4 Do not take a purse or bag or sandals; and do not greet anyone on the road. 5 “When you enter a house, first say, ‘Peace to this house.’ 6 If someone who promotes peace is there, your peace will rest on them; if not, it will return to you.7 Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages.

Is it realistic to believe that these early churches, usually meeting in homes, were paying full time salaries to multiple elderS, much less to lowly "ruling elders"? Ruling elders who in today's world have been put on "Mute"?

Remember in 1 Timothy 5, it is those who ruled well that were worthy of double honor...

And don't overlook the fact that in the same letter slaves were also to honor their masters. It would be absurd to believe that they, the slaves, were paying full or even part-time salaries.

The charity of the early churches was NEEDS BASED, as is highlighted in the above post. This principle is the key. If anyone needs help, particularly male and female seniors - it is then that the churches can and should step in, assuming their own families are not in the picture.

Not all female elders received aid nor did all senior men, that is, the elders of the church.

Obviously, in the real world those MEN entering old age would need help. The apostle had these in mind when he wrote to Timothy. In fact, right now in my own family there are cases of the aging men needing more help than the aging women. Paul had these men ALSO in mind, along with the senior widows.

Naturally, he devotes more time to these females - the πρεσβῦτις (presbutis) - than to the πρεσβύτερος (presbuteros) as the elderly females are more likely to be helpless and needing attention.

Paul here, 1 Timothy 5:17f, was not suddenly changing the conversation from senior support to that of church government. Calvin, btw, could not find these silent "ruling elders" until his 3rd edition of his famous Institutes. Which, btw, is a contradiction to the mandate of all elders of the church being required to teach.

If what I say here is accurate, then the church has sadly misappropriated hundreds of billions of dollars. Worse still, tens of thousands of churches have been shut down due to their inability to pay the "preacher's salary."

And laid them down at the apostles' feet, and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. Acts 4:35