Arminian Today

Does the New Testament promote the idea of full-time elders (or pastors)?  I know of many of my friends on this blog and outside who not only hold that it does but also they are full-time pastors.  In almost all cases they applied for their pastorate like any other job complete with paperwork and interviews.  In fact, the modern pastorate often resembles a CEO of a company more than taking over a church of God.  In many cases the interviews are full of questions mainly about budgets, organization abilities, and of course, numbers.  Attendance is a big issue for institutional churches since they operate on budgets that must be met.  I know of one large church in my area that sent out their yearly budget that totaled over $7 million dollars.  Less than 3% of that was going to missions.  Most of that $7 million was salaries and their buildings.  Since numbers drive the institutional church, the potential pastor must show that they can produce large results through various ides and organization.  The masses have to be kept happy.

The house church is nothing near that.  First of all, we have no budget.  Each person can give their money to whatever they want.  We don’t want it.  We don’t need it.  Occasionally we might have a family who needs money or a church planter who needs funds but we don’t regularly need your money.  Second, we have no buildings to pay for.  We have no mortgage.  We have no bills.  We offer no work insurance.  We pay no taxes since we own nothing and receive nothing.  Third, we have no staff.  We don’t pay a pastor.  We don’t pay a youth pastor.  We don’t pay a music leader.  We have elders who led us but they are not paid.

So what do we want you to do with the money that God gives you?  We want you to do what He tells you to do with in the New Testament.  First, Jesus said to give to the poor (Matthew 6:2-4; Galatians 2:10).  Secondly, give to hurting Christians (Acts 4:34-35; 11:27-30; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2).  Third, give to supporting apostles or church planters or missionaries (1 Corinthians 9:8-14; Philippians 4:10-20).  There is no biblical mandate in the New Testament to tithe to a local church to support their paying bills, salaries, etc.  Tithing is biblical but under the theocracy known as Israel.  We are not a theocracy.  Not once in the Epistles do the writers exhort God’s people to tithe.  If failing to tithe brings one under a curse (as some teach from Malachi 3:8-10) then surely the New Testament writers would want to keep us from that curse.  Sadly, those who teach this “cursed” view of Malachi 3:8-10 fail to show it this applies to Galatians 3:13.

Yet does the New Testament teach that there should be full-time elders?  In Acts 20 we have Paul holding a pastors conference (v. 17).  Paul the Apostle teaches these elders various things but one interesting thing that he says is in verse 35.  The words here are ascribed to Jesus although the Gospels do not contain them.  Using the words of Jesus, Paul tells the elders that it is more blessed to give than to receive.  Can you imagine hearing a prosperity preacher saying that to his TV audience today?  In fact, the thrust of Acts 20:33-35 is that Paul wants these elders to work and not seek money.  He point to his own example (Acts 18:1-4) as proof that he worked hard so that he could give his money to the weak (ESV).  In essence, Paul wanted these elders not to be full-time but to work so that they could give away their money.  What a radical concept for our time!

The other places we find the issue of money and elders is 1 Corinthians 9.  1 Corinthians 9 is not really about elders however.  In fact, elders are not found at all in 1 or 2 Corinthians.  Given how important the modern pastorate is in most churches, you would think that Paul the Apostle would address the elders to correct the troubles at Corinth.  He never does.  He expects the Spirit of God to lead His Church and for the people of God to obey the Spirit who leads them.  Not once in Corinthians does Paul address any leaders.  In 1 Corinthians 9 Paul deals with missionaries receiving money for preaching the gospel.  In verses 8-14 he makes the clear point that those who preach the gospel should live off the gospel.  Yet then Paul turns around and says that he has not done this despite his right to do so.  He tells the Corinthians that he didn’t want to be a stumbling block to them (vv. 15-18).  Paul could have asked for money but he gave up his right so that he could preach the gospel without hinderance.  In Acts 18:1-4 we find that Paul worked as a tent maker while preaching the gospel in Corinth.  He willfully gave up his rights to being paid so that he could work hard, give away his money, and preach the gospel.  How many modern pastors are doing that?

The final place we find elders and money is in 1 Timothy 5:17-18.  A couple of points are in order.  First, verse 17 does not use the word “money.”  I believe many read into verse 17 way too much about “double honor” as to teach that elders should be paid double what they would earn outside of the church.  The word “honor” here does not denote money.  The word is never used in the New Testament as a substitute for the word money.  Yet I have no trouble with honoring an elder who leads with much grace and ability in teaching the Word of God.  This honor can come in various ways including giving them money.  I don’t think we should isolate this verse and make it teach only money but we can give money to elders who fit this picture of verse 17.  Yet I don’t see in this verse that it teaches that elders should receive a regular salary.  Gifts?  Yes.  Salary?  No.  There is a big difference.

Frankly, I am weary of paying an elder very often since this could lead to one elder being exalted above others and can lead to this elder becoming a typical CEO type pastor only in a house church setting.  The plurality of leaders in the house church (Titus 1:5) helps to offset one elder dominating the others.  It also helps because elders are gifted in various ways other than teaching.  A full-time elder also would have a hard time fulfilling Acts 20:35 if in fact their income comes from the house church.

Lastly, if a house church is large enough to support a full-time elder, they are probably too large.  It’s time to split that house church.  House churches are strong because of personal relationships with one another.  This can’t happen if the house church is too large.  I recommend that house churches be no larger than a living room.  If everyone can comfortably be in a living room to worship God, pray, sing, eat, etc. then that is perfect.  Keep in mind that elders are to be among the people of God and not over them (1 Peter 5:1-4).

Hard work is something that we are scarred of in the West.  We need not be.  How wonderful it is to work hard and then to take our money and give it away to the kingdom of God through the poor, hurting disciples, or missionaries.  We are not to hoard up our funds but to give them away (Matthew 6:19-21).  Our treasure is not this world or money but the Lord Himself.  He is our delight and our reward.

One of the most common arguments I hear from traditional (or institutional) churches is that house churches are opposed to leadership.  One blogger put it this way, “House churches want to play church instead of being the church.”  Traditional churches pride themselves on their clergy-laity division, that they have leaders in place whereas it is assumed that house churches oppose any thought of a leader telling them what to do.

Well this is partly true.  First of all we hold that Jesus is the head of His Church.  As did the New Testament.  As do all evangelical churches.  Colossians 1:18 says, “He is also the head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the first-born from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything” (NASB).  Ephesians 1:22 echoes the same thought.  Jesus is the head of His Church.  Not a pastor.  Not a pope.  Not a priest.  Not any flesh but only Jesus is Lord over His Church.  Therefore it is true that we in the house church movement oppose someone telling disciples what to do or think since Jesus is the Lord of His Church.  We need to heed the words of Christ as found in the Scriptures above the creeds and confessions of human beings.  We believe that leaders in the church are not to lord it over others faith but be examples of true faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Peter 5:1-5).

The ironic thing about reading the New Testament is that you find not a lot of information about leaders in the church.  Only one letter in the New Testament even addresses the leaders from the outset and that is Philippians (1:1).  All of the New Testament letters are addressed to the saints when it would be assumed by modern traditional churches that leaders would first be addressed since the professional clergy set the tone for the local church.  The clergy set the agenda, the vision, the purpose, etc. for the local church.  This is not the case with the New Testament.

Leadership is addressed in the New Testament.  Jesus spoke about leadership in Matthew 20:20-28 but He contrasts the worldly leadership that the Jews had seen with true servant leadership that He called for and demonstrated with His life and death (Mark 10:45).  Leadership is addressed in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9.  Ephesians 4:11 speaks of gifted people who God gives the Church but for a reason: to equip the saints to do the work of the ministry (vv. 12-16) and not to pay someone else to do the work of the ministry.  Leaders are mentioned in Hebrews 13:7, 17 and 1 Peter 5:1-4.  Elders are mentioned in James 5:14.  You’ll notice how important elders were to the New Testament Church.  What you will not find is the idea of one professional pastor serving over a church with a deacon board or a group of elders helping the pastor lead the church.  The word pastor appears only in our English Bibles in Ephesians 4:11 and the ESV correctly translates it “shepherds.”  Jesus is the true shepherd of the flock of God (John 10:1-16; 1 Peter 2:25; Hebrews 13:20).

So what does leadership look like in a house church then?  First of all, we have elders.  A biblical house church should have a plurality of elders (Titus 1:5) who lead the house church.  Their purpose is not to be over the people of God but among the people of God (1 Peter 5:2).  The elders are to fit the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9.  The elders are not professional Christians although they could receive some money as a gift from time to time (1 Timothy 5:17-18).  No where does the New Testament call elders to abandon the “secular” for the “ministry.”  Elders are to lead by example and not as professionals who dominate the local church life (Hebrews 13:7, 17).

Secondly, leadership in the local house church is often consensus based.  In Acts 13:1-3 we see the Holy Spirit leading the church in Antioch and He does so through the people of God.  Notice that the people of God were seeking the Lord for Himself (v. 2) and it was during this time that the Spirit called Barnabas and Saul for a specific work (in this case to be apostles or sent ones; see verse 4).  The church didn’t quickly say okay but again they fasted and prayed to come to a consensus about this call.

In Acts 15 we find another example of consensus.  Here the church meets to debate the relationship between the Law of Moses and the grace of Christ.  The church comes to a consensus after much debate (Acts 15:22).

1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is another example.  Here Paul is addressing an issue among the Corinthians about head coverings.  His point throughout these verses is that the church needs to come to consensus over this issue as he states in verse 16.

What this looks like on a practical level is that house churches often move slowly.  Unlike the traditional churches who vote on issues all the time and are building buildings and doing this or that, house churches are slow to act and instead seek God for His wisdom, to study Scripture, and to come to a consensus over issues.  Some issues are quickly solved while others must be handled with much prayer and wisdom from the Lord.  Keep this in mind, however, that Jesus is the Lord of His Church and He is faithful to His Church.  We need only to wait on Him and obey all that He has taught us (Matthew 28:20).  No matter the issue, Jesus should be the main focus and His glory is to our aim.

Lastly, the priesthood of the believers is vital to the local house church.  Each person can study the Scriptures and can speak for God (1 Peter 4:10-11).  All of us are called by God to glorify His name and to proclaim Him.  All of us can hear from God in His Word (John 8:47).  All of us have the Spirit of God living within us (Romans 8:9) and all of us can be led by the Spirit (Romans 8:14) and He is able to speak through us.  We should be open to all disciples of Jesus sharing from the Scriptures or giving a teaching since we are all priests unto the Lord (1 Peter 2:4-11) and all of us can give input into the kingdom of Christ (1 Corinthians 14:26).  Elders are not to be the only ones teaching the Bible.  Elders certainly are to keep the house church sound doctrinally (Titus 1:9; 2:1) but elders are not to dominate the house church meetings.

Leadership in the house church is important and should not be rejected.  God raises up elders to glorify His name through their passion and examples.  Elders are not to dominate the people of God nor are elders to be professional Christians but they are to serve as servant leaders of God’s saints.  We need godly leadership in the local church but what we don’t need is more of the CEO-type leadership that we find in the traditional churches.  Only Jesus is truly head of His Church.  Let us exalt Him for His leaders while He Himself is our true leader.

Most house churches don’t have a doctrinal statement.  Some do.  I know of a house church in Atlanta, Georgia that follows the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689 which is Calvinistic while holding to particulars of being Baptist.  Most house churches that I know do not have a clear doctrinal statement other than a common faith among those who attend.  Of course a biblical house church will stay true to the orthodox faith if they are truly led of the Holy Spirit and seeking to make sure their faith is based on Scripture alone.  Some house churches deviate from sound doctrine and wander into error as Paul the Apostle predicted in Acts 20:29.  Satan seeks to lead God’s people away from sound doctrine and into error (1 Timothy 4:1; 1 John 4:1-2).  After all, Scripture calls Satan the “father of lies” (John 8:44).

In a biblical house church, doctrine is important.  Paul reminded the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 1:10 that they were to be united in the same mind and judgement.  This can only happen if disciples of Jesus in the local house church are seeking Jesus above all (Colossians 3:1-3) and are seeking to build their lives firmly upon His teachings as found in His Word (Matthew 7:24-27; John 8:31-32).  When the 3,000 were saved on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 we read in Acts 2:42 that the disciples devoted themselves to the Apostles’ teachings.  Later this would become Scripture as Jesus had promised (John 16:14-15).

In the midst then of seeking unity around doctrine, how are we to handle the ongoing Arminian/Calvinist debate in our unique setting.  No house churches fall under the authority of a denomination or a pastor.  We seek to follow the leading of our head, the Lord Jesus Christ (Colossians 1:15-20).  Our passion is to be disciples of Jesus and not flesh.  Yet within the house churches are Arminians and Calvinists alike.  So let me offer a few pointers regarding this issue for house churches.

1.  Focus on the Essentials and Have Fun Debating the Non-Essentials

House churches are known for living out our discipleship with one another.  When you come to a house church you are not coming to hear a lecture on doctrine.  You are not coming to give money for the overpriced church building.  You are coming to partake in the Lord’s Supper (Acts 2:42; 20:7; 1 Corinthians 11:20) to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus our Lord (1 Corinthians 11:26) through our fellowship with the saints of God.  In this setting, I pray that house churches would focus on the essentials of the gospel and not arguing and split over non-essentials.  We can debate end times, spiritual gifts, does God still speak, etc. but let us not divide over non-essentials.  Both Arminians and Calvinists believe the gospel.  We believe in the power of God to save sinners through the shed blood of Jesus (Matthew 26:28).  We might argue about how someone came to be in Christ but we will not argue that all people need to come to Christ to be saved by grace.

2.  Love One Another

Jesus said that all men would know that we are His disciples not by our doctrinal convictions but by our love for one another.  A family is the most common term we find to describe the Body of Christ.  By faith in Jesus we are now children of God (Romans 8:14-16).  We are placed by the Spirit into the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13) and we become one with other believers (Ephesians 2:19-22; 4:4).  We are commanded by Jesus to love one another.  Love is the greatest gift given to the saint of God (1 Corinthians 13).  Paul told the Galatians in Galatians 5:13-14 that we are to serve one another out of love and that love fulfills the law of the Lord.  Love is the first fruit mentioned in Galatians 5:22-23 for disciples.

3.  Lay Down Your Pride

Pride would seek to convince us that we are right and all others are wrong.  If a person doesn’t believe what I believe about A then they are wrong.  We need more love for the saints and we need to lay down our pride.  Hold firmly to sound doctrine but allow the Holy Spirit to teach you.  This doesn’t mean that we don’t hold to doctrinal convictions but we must not be so prideful as to think that we are always right about all issues.  We are but flesh and blood.  Remember that God opposes the proud but He gives grace to the humble (1 Peter 5:5).  Pride comes before a fall (Proverbs 16:18).  Avoid the trap of Satan.

4.  Wash One Another’s Feet (John 13:14-15)

Jesus was the ultimate servant.  He said that He came not to be served but to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45).  Isaiah prophesied in Isaiah 52:13 that the Messiah would be the servant of Yahweh.  Jesus told His disciples in John 13 after washing their feet to wash one another’s feet.  He was meaning more than just washing feet but He was pointing to His example of a servant’s heart.  It’s very hard to argue with our brothers and sisters if we are seeking to serve them ahead of ourselves.  This is the example of our Lord (Philippians 2:1-11).  It should be ours as well.  Service goes a long ways beyond debating.

5.  Never Make Arminianism or Calvinism the Gospel

The gospel of Jesus is not Arminianism.  The gospel of Jesus is not Calvinism.  The gospel of Jesus is the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).  It is not the teachings of Arminius or Wesley or Luther or Calvin.  It is the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus our Lord and God.  When we make our doctrinal convictions the gospel, we will soon lose sight of Jesus and His glorious work on the cross and His powerful resurrection.  Remember that only Jesus saves sinners for His glory (1 Corinthians 3:6-9).  He alone receives the worship for salvation (Revelation 5:9-10).

6.  Seek God in Prayer

Prayer has a way of tearing down our theological arguments unlike any other discipline I know.  When brothers and sisters come together to seek God in prayer, the Holy Spirit begins to move among us and He opens our hearts to our pride, our sins, and He causes us to love each other deeply through intercession.  Prayer is to be the heart of the house church (Colossians 4:2).  Prayer should drive our discipleship (Luke 18:1).  We should pray without ceasing (1 Thessalonians 5:17).  We should be a praying church as the early disciples were (Acts 2:42).  When we come together to pray, Arminianism and Calvinism seem so pointless in comparison.  At the time of prayer, the only thing that matters is the gospel of Jesus Christ that unites our hearts to fear His name.

Conclusion

House churches offer the unique opportunity of fellowship that traditional churches do not.  When you enter a house church you are not coming to stare at the back of another person’s head but you are coming to be with fellow disciples of Jesus and some of them may not agree fully with your theology.  We must agree to the fundamentals of the faith but we can show charity toward one another when it comes to non-essentials.  God is bigger than our debates.  God does not need you and I to protect Himself from heresy.  His Word is powerful enough to do that (Hebrews 4:12-13).  Our duty before God is to love the saints and to cherish our time together on this planet (Hebrews 10:23-25).

The Lord’s Day.  Millions of people will head off to church today.  They will pack into their buildings, their gyms, their rented facilities, a few in houses.  They will sit and listen to a band play various types of music ranging from contemporary (rock) to classical.  They will listen to a lecture (sermon).  They will be asked to give money.  They will shake hands with a few people and some will even pray for a few people.  And then they will go home.  Church is over for almost all of them.

Yet is that the picture of the New Testament Church?  First of all, you won’t find the buildings.  I am all for house churches because the house church can move quickly, doesn’t pay a dime to rent or a bank, has no utility bills, and can be very flexible with where they meet whether in a home or a park.  Secondly, the building shouts “show” or “event” more than church.  The structure of modern church buildings is focused on one thing: the stage.  The people (laity) stare at the stage and watch the show called church.  This not found in the New Testament.  The Apostles wanted people to focus on Jesus Christ and give Him all the glory.  Modern healing evangelists love to parade their “healings” while the Apostles focused completely on the Lord and His power (Acts 3).

In the New Testament we find 52 “one another” passages of Scripture.  How can the modern church even begin on Sunday morning to obey those passages?  I know some who defend the modern church will say that small groups, cell groups, Sunday school, or other discipleship methods are the way to obey those passages.  But is that honestly what the church is about?  3/4 of the people who attend a Sunday morning church “service” will not be in a small group or under discipleship.  Most come to church and think that is enough and frankly, they have been told that is true.  As long as they are giving their money to the local church, most churches don’t concern themselves with that person during the week.  They are free to do what they like.  The New Testament Church was daily meeting (Acts 2:46).  They were not relegated to only the Lord’s Day to come together to break bread.  They met daily and were small enough to do so because they met in homes primarily (Colossians 4:15; cf. Romans 16:5). They had no large edifices that they called “church” (for that would have been illegal and would defeated their purpose).

The Church is not a meeting place.  It is not a house.  It is not a building.  It is not a denomination.  The Church is composed of true disciples of Jesus (Acts 11:26) who take up their crosses daily to follow Jesus (Luke 9:23-25).  The Church is composed of true disciples who have been baptized into Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13).  The Church has structure (Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Timothy 3:1-7) but no where in the New Testament do we find one person leading the Church (the lead pastor).  The Church always had a plurality of leaders in the New Testament (Acts 20:17; Titus 1:5).  The Church submits to the Lordship of the Holy Spirit to lead her and guide her through the Scriptures (Acts 13:1-3).  Jesus is Lord of His Church and not any flesh (Colossians 1:15-20).

The Church does not exist to worship God as a primary function.  Worship is a lifestyle (Hebrews 12:1-2).  The Church exists to equip the saints to do the work of the ministry and to edify the saints as they go out into the world to make disciples.  1 Corinthians 14 is clear that edification is the focus of the disciples when they come together.  Certainly the Church does worship God in singing, prayer, the Word, etc. but the main focus is edification (Hebrews 3:13; 10:24-26).  Oddly, at least to us, the New Testament disciples met to celebrate the Lord’s Supper as a sign of His resurrection and hope that He would return (1 Corinthians 11:17-34).  However, no where does the New Testament present preaching as the primary purpose of coming together.  In fact, 1 Corinthians 14:26 would destroy the modern church view that preaching or hearing one person speak to us is the main reason that we meet.  You’ll find no superstars in the New Testament meetings (1 Corinthians 12:24-26).

A book I do recommend that you read about the New Testament Church and how we today practice church is, The Normal Christian Church Life by Watchmen Nee.  Nee is not perfect in his theology but he is right on in this book on the Church.  How unfortunate that we are so far removed from the New Testament practice of Church that we know nothing of the modern errors of the modern Church.  I pray that God will reform and restore His Church as He is doing all over the world for His glory.

Tithing, like baptism or spiritual gifts, has a tendency to divide people and bring out the debating side of folks.  This was true of my post on house churches and tithing.  As I pointed out, house churches don’t need the tithe.  What would we want with your money?  We have no clergy-laity system that needs your money.  We have no buildings that requires we take your money.  We have no denominations to support with your money.  From time to time we might ask for a gift to be given to help the poor, hurting Christians, or to support apostles (or sent ones) but other than that, we don’t need or want your money.  You are free to support whatever you want to support from giving to missions to giving to the poor to giving to causes such as cancer research.  Jesus said that His disciples would give (Matthew 6:2-4) and Jesus was specific in Matthew 6:2 that His disciples would give to the needy.  I would hardly call a professional Christians salary “needy”.  I would also point out that Paul said in Galatians 2:10 to remember the poor.  This would be the same as the words of Jesus in Matthew 6:2.  Jesus also taught His own Apostles in Matthew 10:9 that they were not to acquire gold or silver (money).  While this is obviously in the context of Jesus sending out the Twelve to preach the gospel, it is interesting that Jesus would make such a statement knowing that the Church would follow their pattern.

I have a friend who is a clergyman.  He is the pastor of a medium-sized Baptist church and he posted conceding the issue of tithing.  So I thought I would offer a friendly response to his post.  You can find the post here.  His post was not written against me nor against the house church movement as he was following up a sermon that he had preached on the subject of giving.

Before I take a look at his points, let me state a few things about giving and tithing.  First, I have no doubt that disciples of Jesus Christ will be generous since our Lord was Himself generous.  We must be careful, however, not to make generosity all about money.  We can be generous with our time, our work, even our words.  Romans 12:7 does speak of disciples being generous in contributions.  It is helpful to understand what contributions Paul was referring to.  I believe that it is in error to read into “contributions” as tithing or giving to a local church to support the clergy-laity system or fund a building.  That would be reading into the text something Paul did not say.  When we look to Acts we find that the disciples contributed mainly to helping hurting believers such as in Acts 11:27-30.  This was also the praise Paul had in mind in 2 Corinthians 8-9.

Secondly, I don’t really care if a person “tithes” so long as they are giving to biblical reasons.  I find nothing in the New Testament to suggest that we should tithe or that the tithe must be given to a local church to support a professional Christian who “earns” their income by doing the work of the ministry that the church as a whole should be doing.  I also find nothing in the New Testament to suggest that tithing was required to support buildings of any kind.  Even John MacArthur in The MacArthur Study Bible acknowledges that the early Church met in homes (see Acts 2:46 or Romans 16:5 for examples of just a few house churches in the New Testament).  If tithing, as taught today, was to be a biblical practice for New Testament churches, why is nothing said about the practice?

Thirdly, I believe the clergy-laity system prevents people from seeing that the New Testament doesn’t promote tithing.  Clergymen want to see tithing in the New Testament because their livelihood depends upon the system.  To teach otherwise might endanger their positions and they might have to get a “secular” job.  A few, such as John MacArthur above, reject tithing but most evangelicals accept the practice.

In my friend’s post he first traces the history of the tithe in the Old Testament.  I have little to say about this other than to point out the obvious that the tithe was the equivalent of taxes in the theocracy of Israel.  Tithing, as I have often stated, is biblical but is now obsolete in Christ (Hebrews 8:13).  The Law does mention tithing but we are not under the law but under grace as New Testament disciples of Jesus (Romans 6:14).  The ceremonial aspects of the Law are gone as Jesus finished the work of the Law for us (John 19:30).  I would also point out that while the tithe was before the Law, the Scripture says that Abram tithed (Genesis 14:20 and referenced in Hebrews 7:4) and Jacob likewise tithed in Genesis 28:22 but in both cases they tithed once their entire lives at least as far as we can tell from Scripture.  The Scripture never says that Abraham nor Jacob ever tithed again but if the practice was so vital to Christians then why is tithing found only once in their lives?  I believe it is a very weak argument to state that tithing is biblical because Abram and Jacob tithed once and this must be a pattern for us to now tithe weekly to a clergy-laity system.

My friend then moves on to post on the history of the tithe in the New Testament.  He first states the truth that there are few references to tithing.  He states that Jesus endorsed the tithe in Matthew 23:23 and that Jesus pointed out that the Pharisee tithed in Luke 18:12.  A couple of points here.  First, Jesus is not endorsing the tithe for New Testament disciples.  In the context Jesus is rebuking the Pharisees for their failure to keep the Law.  In fact, in every reference to tithing in the New Testament, it is looking at the practice under the Law of Moses (except in Hebrews 7:4).  Matthew 23 is speaking to the Pharisees who are under the Law.  Luke 18:12 can hardly serve as a good example of tithing for New Testament disciples since Jesus is pointing out the hypocrisy of the Pharisee and not praising him.  Jesus did teach that His disciples would give (Matthew 6:2-4) but He never says that we should tithe nor does any other passages in the New Testament.

The next section refers to the practice of tithing in the history of the Church up to the current day.  I don’t deny that tithing was taught by the Roman Catholics (as was the worship of Mary and praying to the saints and the exaltation of the papacy among other heretical teachings).  I don’t deny that many Protestants taught tithing as they failed to reformed the Church completely to preaching the priesthood of the saints but instead maintained the clergy-laity system as seen among the Catholics and Orthodox.  Certainly you can find quote after quote of Church Fathers calling people to tithe.  However, the quotes by the Church Fathers hardly are Scripture.  Just because John Calvin endorses the tithe or anyone else doesn’t mean that it is necessarily biblical to do so.  In many European nations, all people “tithe” to the state Church such as in Germany with the Lutheran Church or in England with the Church of England.  This “tithe” has caused many problems in evangelism as people see the Church as only money hungry and not truly preaching the gospel or helping people at all.

My friend closes his post with nine points about being generous.  He writes:

• Giving is an act of grace developed in all Christians. All Christians give.  No stingy Christians.
• It spreads through testimony.
• It’s consistent and persevering.
• It’s tied to the giving of one’s entire self.
• It’s rooted in the Gospel.
• Churches should do the right thing with what is given.
• Church leaders should be seen doing what is right with what is given.
• “Sowing” generosity may not “reap” more money, but will reap good works, righteousness, more generosity, and worship.
• Giving is ultimately about God, not the givers.

I don’t disagree with any of the above points.  My only added point would be that we are not required to give to a local church.  Many clergymen would teach the above but then tell people that they must be generous in giving to that church.  I disagree.  You are free to give your money to whatever you desire (2 Corinthians 9:6-7).  We are not bound anywhere in the New Testament to give to support a clergy-laity system.  We are free to support whatever we desire so long as we are using the money that God has given us to glorify Him.

The post closes with the following:

• Jesus endorsed tithing, and Paul expected full-time ministry in the church to be paid by the congregation (Matthew 23:23 and 1 Corinthians 9:13-14).
• Ask, “How much dare I keep?” instead of “How much should I give?”
• Wealth-building is wise, but so that we can give in fear of covetousness and greed (Hebrews 13:5, 2 Corinthians 8:13-15).

I have already commented on Matthew 23:23 and how Jesus is rebuking the Pharisees who are under the Law and yet not really living it.  But does 1 Corinthians 9:13-14 mean that we should have a professional Christian serving over one church?  First of all, the Bible never teaches that one person is to “run” the local church.  The New Testament presents elders as leading the local church (Acts 20:17; Titus 1:5).  We always find “elders” in the plural form when speaking of leaders of the Church and we always find leaders in the plural form as well (see Hebrews 13:7, 17 for example).  We don’t find a one man show in the New Testament.

Regarding 1 Corinthian 9:13-14, let me state first that verse 14 is often isolated to appear to teach tithing or at least supporting a professional Christian in “full-time ministry.”  Is this the case?  First of all, verse 14 never says anything about money.  In fact, verse 13 mentions mainly food.  Even further, the context of 1 Corinthians 9:14 shows that Paul is actually pointing out that he is glad that he did not receive support from the Corinthians and he states clearly in verse 18 what his reward is for preaching the gospel.  Read in its context, 1 Corinthians 9:14 is hardly a good verse to support a clergy-laity system.  Even Paul himself gladly worked which many clergymen are not willing to do but instead preach an Old Testament Levitical priesthood that would cause people to think that they must give their money to support a professional Christian as they “do the work of the ministry.”

Having previously discussed the problems with the clergy-laity system and how I believe it robs the people of God from being true priests unto Him (Revelation 1:5-6), I then looked at what it biblically means to be a pastor.  I noted that the word “pastor” is found in most English translations in Ephesians 4:11 and is better translated (as in the ESV) as “shepherds”.  The word “pastor” has largely remained part of our language because of transition and not because of accurate Bible translations.  I noted that Jesus is called “shepherd” or “pastor” in John 10:14 or 1 Peter 2:25 and He is called the chief shepherd in 1 Peter 5:4.  I also noted that no one in the New Testament were given titles such as Pastor Jim or Apostle David for only Jesus was viewed as Lord of lords and King of kings (1 Timothy 6:15-16; Revelation 17:14; 19:11).

Now let us turn to studying the Apostles.  The Apostles play a major role in the New Testament.  While on earth Jesus Christ appointed twelve men that He called Apostles according to Matthew 10:2-4 and Luke 6:12-16.  If you will notice Luke 6:13, we learn that Jesus chose His Apostles from among His disciples implying that He had many disciples.  We know from John 4:1-2 that Jesus was gaining and baptizing many disciples.  Jesus then prayed and from His disciples, He chose twelve men and He called them apostles.  It’s interesting that Jesus called them apostles.  Why this term?  We miss something of the term in the English translations.  Our traditions often rob us of seeing the bigger picture.  When Jesus called these twelve men “apostles” He was calling them, in the Greek, apostolos.  English Bible translations, like they do baptism, simply transliterates the Greek term into English and thus we miss its full meaning.  The word means “emissary, ambassador, authorized representative, delegated authority, a missionary.”  The term was used in the Roman Empire for their naval leaders who would carry bills of laden that contained the apostle terms of being under the direct authority of the emperor himself.  They were sent ones from the emperor.

The term used by Matthew in Matthew 10:2 is this same Greek word.  It means “sent ones.”  Yet when we hear the word “apostles” we automatically think of the twelve apostles of Jesus.  Yet the New Testament presents others who were “sent ones” of Christ Jesus who were not part of the original twelve apostles such as in Acts 14:4, 14 of Barnabas and Paul.  Romans 16:7 also reveals other apostles not of the twelve.  In 1 Corinthians 9:1-6 Paul builds his case for being an apostle despite not being part of the twelve.  In 1 Corinthians 15:5 Paul mentions the twelve and then says that he is also an apostle in verse 9.  In 1 Thessalonians 2:6 Paul writes about being an apostle and he includes among the apostles also Silvanus and Timothy (1 Thessalonians 1:1) with his usage of we.  The Bible also mentions false apostles in 2 Corinthians 11:13 and Revelation 2:2.  Jesus Christ Himself is called an apostle or “sent one” in Hebrews 3:1.

In Ephesians 2:20 we learn that the Church is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ Jesus being the cornerstone.  Why the foundation of the apostles and the prophets?  The ESV Study Bible is helpful here:

There are several views about the apostles and prophets referred to here: (1) Some think that they were “foundational” because they proclaimed the very words of God, and some of their words became the books of the NT. Since a “foundation” is laid only once (i.e., at the beginning of the church) there are no more apostles or prophets today, but their function of speaking the words of God has been replaced by the written Bible, which is the foundation today. (2) Others argue that these “prophets” are very closely tied to apostles in the phrase “the apostles and prophets,” and that these prophets do not represent all who had a gift of prophecy in the early church (see note on 1 Cor. 12:10); they were a small group closely associated with the apostles (or else identical to the apostles) to whom God had revealed the mystery of the Gentile inclusion in the church (see Eph. 3:5, where the same phrase, “the apostles and prophets,” occurs). In this case ordinary Christians who had the gift of prophecy in Ephesus (4:11) and other churches (cf. Acts 11:27; 19:6; 21:9–10; Rom. 12:6; 1 Cor. 12:10; 1 Thess. 5:19–21; 1 Tim. 1:18; 4:14) were not part of the “foundation” but were part of the rest of the building that was being built (that is, the church) and would continue so throughout the church age. (3) Finally, some think the “prophets” here could be the OT prophets, though the same words in Eph. 3:5 point to prophets of the NT era.

I believe that the prophets here in Ephesians 2:20 along with 1 Corinthians 12:28 means that the apostles and prophets helped plant the churches.  The apostles were “sent ones” as in Acts 13:1-4 who went out preaching the gospel (as all disciples did according to Matthew 28:19-20) and planting churches.  The prophetic element was not so much as in the Old Testament sense of the word but declaring the words of God that we know have fully in the inerrant New Testament.  Ephesians 4:11 again mentions prophets after apostles.  All these gifted people were needed by the Church to establish a true Church.

Now I don’t mean to undermine the authority of the Apostles in the New Testament Church.  In fact, according to Revelation 21:14 the city of heaven is said to have been built on the foundation of twelve and upon them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb (ESV).  In eternity, the twelve will still have a unique place in the history of the Church and the salvation that came through Jesus Christ.

So who are then New Testament apostles?  First, there are the Twelve.  Second, there were other NT apostles such as Paul and Barnabas.  And today, we call modern apostles as “missionaries” or “sent ones.”  Their purpose is to build churches in places that Jesus has not been named.  Romans 15:20-21 establishes this type of ministry.  Apostles can often serve God “full-time” and depend on the churches but sometimes they do work such as Paul did in Acts 18:3.  Paul even makes his case in Acts 20:34-35 for his own hard work so that he could help others.  How radically different from most money hungry pastors today?  I love his words in Acts 20:33 where he says that he did not covet anyone’s silver or gold or apparel.  How we need that in the Church!  By the way, the longest Paul ever remained in one city: 3 years in Corinth.  How different from many “missionaries” who stay in cities sometimes for years building usually one church or two at the most.

We need “sent ones” today to build the Church.  My vision is to see modern apostles going into cities such as for example, Phoenix, and planting house churches under the leadership of the Holy Spirit and elders (Titus 1:5) that the Spirit raises up (Acts 14:23).  These house churches would then send out more sent ones to plant more house churches.  Disciples making disciples as Jesus commanded.  These sent ones are “full-time ministers” in the sense that they are supported by the Churches to plant more churches just as Paul did in the New Testament.  These men are not professional Christians but would work if necessary as Paul did.