Q2. Tentmaking

[Pastor Ralph]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

[Travis81]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? 

Although it wasn’t wrong to receive offering, Paul wanted to be a positive example unto church – Paul did not want to be a financial burden to the church – Paul wasn’t a hireling, he loved the Lord and he loved those in the call. In his own words in each passage of Scripture he share his motive for living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church as it was applicable to the audience.  

 

Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry?

 

This is a difficult question to answer simply because I have no way of knowing the motive of everyone in full-time Christian ministry. 

It is my belief that some prefer to be in full-time ministry so that he/she may devote themselves to the ministry full-time.

In my opinion, I believe some choose to be in full-time ministry because they are following a perceived template – be it the template is for gains or in sincere desire to serve the Lord as he/she perceive the call to be.

In my obscured opinion, I believe some choose to be in full-time ministry in the likeness of a business/vocation.

I believe in my opinion when some people say full-time ministry he/she is making reference to a created term commonly known as the Five-Fold ministry.  I do not say created term with disrespect or discontent, I do not intend to offend anyone, please forgive me as/if I offend by saying created term. I do understand the correlation to the term. Nonetheless, it’s my belief when some people say full-time ministry he/she are saying they are going to devote time fully to this cause and or office(s).

 

Full-time ministry in my opinion is living out Matthew 22:37-40, 28:19-20, I believe this can/should be accomplished in everyday living. In the vineyard, the market place where ever your feet maybe (whether in business [appropriately, tastefully, respectfully] {sports, entertainment, construction sites, jail, etc..), whether in neighborhood, whether in communities,  or anywhere else you may find yourself, I believe as the Believer lives moves and have their being; he/she should never stop being a serving Christian, I believe you are doing Christian ministry.  

If he/she is lead/called to go on missions glory be to God, go in His Spirit-in His Strength. If a person goes on vacation he/she yet remains a Child of God, he/she should yet serve. I believe this can be done w/o encroaching or intruding upon other vacation time. I don’t time a person has to speak King Jamesnese or in New International interpretation to serve as they witness on vacation. As the Lord leads He will provide, My wife and I were in a foreign country vacationing and on two instances the Lord presented situations to share the Gospel. We could have chose not to get involved and not provide comfort on one of the occasions and we could have chose not to be like the Samaritan on the other. However instead of not responding to the ushering or nudge from the Lord we respond accordingly.  

 

What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

Excerpt Lessons for Disciples – “Paul works bi-vocationally as a tent-maker for several reasons: (a) to earn money to live and for others on his mission, (b) to set an example to people that preachers work hard and aren't idle, (c) to set an example of giving and not coveting money, and (d) to gain a reward for preaching "free of charge" (1 Corinthians 9:16-18)”

[Nandita]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labour rather than through offerings from the church? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?
Paul had several reasons for earning his living through his own labour. Firstly it meant that nobody could have any claim over him or accuse him of being someone's agent. Secondly it allowed him to teach the new Christians several important lessons—many of which were radical for the time and culture he was in (all of which are valid for us today). Two of those lessons are:

1. Productivity. God has given us all gifts. He has given us all purpose. Even if we can afford not to work for a living, we should be productive.

2. Charity. When people go through seasons of hardship we are not to allow them to suffer saying "it's their fault because they aren't working hard enough" or "this too shall pass". We are supposed to help them actively with compassion and generosity. Even if the hardship is of their own making we're called to help them. Remember, the help God gives us always exceeds what we deserve. We never complain that God has blessed us too much, do we? In the same way we should never withhold help because we think we're giving people more than they deserve. 

 

Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry?   

People tend to ascribe full-time work with more value than part-time work. A full-time worker, we believe, has more skill. A full-time worker, we think, is more engaged. A full-time worker, we say, is more dedicated.

 

And all of this is wrong—especially in the context of Christianity. There is no such thing as a part-time Christian. We are Christians for every minute of our lives. Sometimes we're Christians in a church. At other times we are Christians 'out in the field'. But we're always guided by God, always following his plan, and always working for him. Christian ministry needs to happen everywhere. Christian ministers need to go to people who need to be saved—just like Jesus did. Christian ministers need to be living examples of God's will—just like Jesus was. Perhaps God chooses some ministers to work within the church alone. But he has different purposes for us, according to our skills and circumstances, and he therefore calls us to operate in different ways (and different places).

 

Bi-vocational ministry is a wonderful form of ministry, especially since, in an era of corruption and greed, it assures us that our ministers are beholden to nobody but God. 

[haar]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12)

Q. Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church?

A. To leave an example for workers in the vineyard of God to work hard and not to burden the church.

Q. Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry?

A. Some believe that full time evangelism is more productive. I personally think that pastors should not  be distracted from the main evangelical function of tending the flock in as they make effort to work for their up keep.

Q. What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

A. Work hard to earn a living without being a burden to the church.
 

[JanMary]

On 8/28/2019 at 10:40 AM, Pastor Ralph said:

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

1.  Paul wished to be an example to the church by working and being diligent rather than a "lay about" living a disorderly life. He taught the "rule" that "If one won't work he shouldn't eat." The goal was to support ones family and have some extra in order to help widows and orphans and those who were unable to earn a living due to health or age issues, and to send missionaries on their way with a gift until they arrived at their destination and could begin work again.

He didn't want to be a burden on the already burdened church, even though he taught that he and other missionaries had a right to support, he chose to set the tone of a disciplined life rather than being idle and nosing into the affairs of the people.

2. I'm guessing that the thinking might be about scattered focus, rather than full diligence in the ministry.

3. He demonstrated by example a strong work ethic, regardless of what one does for a living, including ministry.

[jesus]

 (Acts 18:3: 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10;  1Corinthians 4:12 )

Paul earns his living by skilled labor than through offerings from the Church because he wanted to set an example for all believers apart from supporting himself and his mission.  In  the church of Thessalonica  there were some lazy people trying to free -load off the church's generosity . Therefore Paul sets a deliberate pattern of work, of supporting himself, so he is a strong example to those  who  would take advantage of Christian benevolence. There were some who were stealing in the church of Ephesus and making their living, and there were some widows who were doing nothing but gossip and were idle. To all such people he set an example to work with their own hands and not depend on others .

Some Christians think that full time Christian ministry is better than bi-vocational ministry because they can full devote their time,talents in serving the Lord rather than getting distracted with other occupations .

Paul taught several lessons by setting himself as an example of working for his living:

a.He set an example of hard work to support oneself and his family rather than depending upon others to do it for you.

b.He set an example bu giving to the poor and the weak . By his earnings  he could share with anyone in need and help the weak. He taught that it was more important to give than to get.

c.He set an example  of not coveting money. there was no element of greed in him.

d.He set an example to receive a reward for his ministry. Paul preached the Gospel pout of obedience and free of charge and did not look for rewards but His obedience to God will bring him the blessings of God.

[Old Jerry]

Paul was earning his living by skilled labor because he wanted to be an example to the church that they should not me lazy and they should earn their living. I think that Christians believe that “full-time Christian ministry” is better than bi-vocational ministry because then they think that it is the preacher job to evangelize and not theirs. I think that Paul was teaching them by example of working for his living that they should be humble and do any work that comes around.

[garymerkel]

In Paul's day the church was just getting off the ground and being "bi-vocational" didn't mean what it means today.  People fed him from time to time, but he also worked as a tent maker in supplying his own needs.  The early churches were usually poor and could not afford to pay anyone.  Sometimes you do what you need to do when you are answering God's call.  

At one time I was bi-vocational, taking a church in NY.  I taught special education middle school at $5.38 an hour (because I wasn't certified in NY, even though I had a masters degree).  We took a church of 15 and $200 a week.  My wife worked for an orthopedic surgeon and made a fair salary.  We believed God had called us to the work and so we did what needed to be done without being a "burden" on the church.  GOD grew the church.

Our Baptist Association now helps support several church plants in another state and in Guatemala.  We believe God has led us to do this.  Now that I'm right at 70 and in good health, I pastor full time, but our church helps other ministries, foreign and local.  Physically, I cannot do what I did when I was 50, but can still do quite a bit.  Each situation is different and ALL ministry positions are needed.

Believing one is better than another is a misunderstanding.  It depends on what GOD has called you to do.  Some "retired" pastors, drawing social security, can pastor a smaller church that cannot pay a full time wage, but need a pastor.  Regardless of being "full time" or "bi-vocational" (which is actually double time), the point is that ministry takes surrendering all for God's use.  I worked at the school 35 hours a week and I served the church 35 hours a week, but I understood the situation before going and we knew God had called us to the work.  God supplied energy to work.  The bottom line issue is:  Has God called you?  Are you willing to obey?  (included husband and wife if married and children if children)  

Stepping out in faith is just that, but NOT blindly and NOT when a spouse is in disagreement.  My wife and I have been unified in 48 years of biblical ministry; 15 years as volunteer youth and music while in business, 3 years as bi-vocational, and 30 years as "full time".  Regardless of the label, we have believed God's call has always been "full time", meaning, giving our all to Him.

[Uncle Dave]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12)

 

 

1.        Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church?

 

Paul was showing by example how people should live, that they should work for a wage and be willing to help those in need. To show that people should not covet money. The love of money is the basis for much of the evil in this world.

2.     Why do you think Christians believe that “full-time Christian ministry” is better than bi-vocational ministry?

 

After much though on this question, I think people are conditioned to think that this is just the way it is supposed to be done. Some see it as an easy way of life, and I have seen some preachers who sure fill this bill, but when it comes to dedicated Christians pastoring a group, their days appear to be quite full of things which need to be done. My first real experience with a Christian pastor involved a young man who was performing in a bi-vocational manner. His days were filled working at a hardware store which gave him a chance to talk to many people (and that he did), he held services three times/week and somehow still had time to visit people in need, helping out in any way possible. The fact that he was working a full-time job did not seem to bother him because his whole life was about retrieving the lost for Jesus and he turned his every awake moment into opportunities. A few years older now, he is still a very busy person. I never really thought about it much as the congregation at that time was very small and the pastor had a wife and 3 little ones to take care of. There was another young pastor in the same town who would hold services at 3 different places. This was in the Appalachians and much open land and not having great income from running the church he had to maintain his own vehicle and sometimes he had to stop and make repairs which meant some dirt or grease on his clothes but he came through to the people so strong that nobody saw it.

The first of these two pastors eventually grew his congregation up to a size where he worked full time ministry, but he too showed by example how giving was more blessed that receiving even when he had very little. The other pastor was exactly the same way. Perhaps I was just blessed to have known them and learned from their examples.

Even when either of them was doing full time ministry, they were just as busy as when they were working secular jobs (probably even busier).

Pastoring is a busy job and personally I don’t understand how, so much is accomplished.

3.        What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

 

Other than what I stated in question one, Paul’s lifestyle taught that it is honorable to work hard and be thankful for what you have (and can keep), rather than stealing for a living and that which you take quickly blows away with the wind. A good work ethic and also being quick to help others based on the fact that we reap what we sow, hard work keeps a person out of trouble and giving always comes back to you when you need it most, and that just might be at the time of your life when you are too old to effectively be as productive as you were when younger.

[Queen Mc Daniel]

 

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church?

Several reasons are given for Paul earning his living by skill labor rather than through offering from the church. (a) to earn money to live and for other on his mission, (b) to set an example to people that preachers work hard and aren’t idle, (c) to set an example of giving and not coveting money, and (d) to gain a reward for preaching “free of charge” (1 Corinthians 9:16-18).

 Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry?

Full time Christian ministry is better as they can focus solely on their calling; it’s better in some ways on family. My husband initially was a bi-vocation pastor, he drove a gas truck, it paid well, but one day that truck caught on fire; it burned the gas station down and the truck up. He went to the church and ask them to find another pastor or call him full time; they did and he pastor that church for 40 years.  

  What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

The lesson Paul taught the believers by his example of working for one’s living first to be a model for them to follow and “if a man will not work, he shall not eat.”(2 Thessalonians 3: 6-10)

 

[hanks]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) 
Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labour rather than through offerings from the church? 
Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? 
What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living? 
Paul earned his way so as not to be a burden to anyone, at the same he was setting an example against idleness. Especially Christians that would use Jesus’ Second Coming as an excuse not to get involved in any work or planning as Jesus was due any moment. Paul was not motivated by the love of money or material things rather his prime reason for living was to preach the gospel as per instructions from Jesus Himself. I think that both full-time and bi-vocational ministries have their advantages and disadvantages and it really depends on individual circumstances. For example, the needs are different if a congregation cannot afford a full-time minister or if the church definitely must have a full-time minister to function properly. Bi-vocational ministers may be free to teach what is needed to be heard, and not perhaps controlled by certain elders. Besides financial and teaching restraints there may be certain circumstances that maximize the effect of a minister, or that might make them more effective in their ministry. Paul taught us that by working for his living he was able to set an example against idleness. Hard work never killed anyone and work is not a four letter word. Financial gain did not motivate him; he was a poor man, as far as material things are concerned, but he was rich toward God. He supported himself and his companions with his trade, and this also made him free from being dependent on anyone. He demonstrated his love for Christ by living out the message of the Cross – suffering deprivation and defamation the same way Jesus did. 
 

[RD35]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

Paul isn't working at his trade only to earn money to support himself and his mission. He sees it as an example to the believers. The Church in Thessalonica, for example, had some trouble with lazy people trying to free-load off the church's generosity.  Paul sets a deliberate pattern of work, of supporting himself, so he is a strong example to those who would take advantage of Christian benevolence. He had a right to support from the church , but did not exercise it because setting an example was more important.

Paul works bi-vocationally as a tent-maker for several reasons: (a) to earn money to live and for others on his mission, (b) to set an example to people that preachers work hard and aren't idle, (c) to set an example of giving and not coveting money, and (d) to gain a reward for preaching "free of charge" (1 Corinthians 9:16-18).

We must forsake a value system that promotes full-time Christian workers as more important than bi-vocational ministers (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12).

[Godswriter]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

I believe he does it because he knows that the Thessalonians need an example of someone who is willing to work and not be a freeloader. But also someone who is a blessing to the Lord by supplying the church with their tithes. I believe it is because that way they can more easily focus on their ministerial needs that they have and not worry about other things that conflict with that. He taught lessons against idleness, taught lessons on hard work and also bivocational ministry and many other things.

 

[blezed]

Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church?

Paul sets the example for the believers that they are not to sit idle but work and support themselves.

Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry?

I think Christians believe "full-time Christian ministry" is better because the focus would be on the needs of the ministry.

What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

Paul taught that you are to work hard to support yourself and family rather than depend on others.

[rosegarden]

On 8/28/2019 at 1:40 PM, Pastor Ralph said:

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

a.  He was a tent maker and a hard worker at that. He wanted to set an example for the people to follow.  He believed in providing for himself and his own family and to have something to share with the needy.    Not to be idle and expect others to provide for him.              For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. 2 Thess. 3:10

b. Because the Pastor of the church is better able to devote his full time for the preaching of the Word, teaching, ministering to the needs of the people, visiting the sick, etc.  Also, If the Pastor has a family, he needs also to spend time and care for them bringing them up in the Lord.

c.  Paul taught them by his example that it takes hard work to support oneself and one's own family, and by helping the poor and weak in the community, not coveting money, and to preach God's Word free of charge brings God's blessings.

 

[t-c]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

 

a. Because he is able to and it sets a good example for the people he was preaching and ministering to. He wanted to be a blessing and not a burden. People were encouraged to work if they were able or not to eat or be fed. (2 Thessalonians 3:10) Also, as they worked they were blessing their brothers and sisters in the Lord. (Acts 20:35)

 

b. I think that we tend to believe that the time demands on 21st century Pastors makes it to difficult for him to hold down a full time job, as well as pastor a church. Although there are many Pastors that do work and also lead churches.

 

c. If you are able, "work." It blesses the body of Christ and it also honors God by being obedient to His will. It blesses the worker.

[Lottie]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

Because he wants them to understand that if a person wanted to have food to eat then he should find some work to do and not be idle. That some were free-loading off of the church instead of working and this was wrong. So paul decided to work instead of asking them to give him money.

I think that some Christians think that a preacher will not give his full attention to the ministry if he has another job or vocation. That they think that pastors are not being obedient to the gospel when they refuse to be paid. That by them giving the pastor a salary that they can keep him in line and dictate to him what he should be doing. That they should have a say in what he does and by him refusing he thwarts their plans. 

1. Support your family and yourself by working hard and not being lazy. 2. Work and make money so you can help the poor and weak in your community, 3. Do not covet after money or the things it can buy. 4. By preaching the gospel without charge you will be blessed by God.

 

[Preistina11]

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? It only shows he depends on the Lord and he has good character and is able to earn with his bare hands, he does not depend on people.

Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? It could be because they believe that they will be to commit fully and would be able to see fruits. But on the other hand part time or full time falls on our alignment with God.

What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living? The lesson of self fulfillment, self gratification and at the same time total dependence on God.

[lighthouse2014]

On 8/28/2019 at 12:40 PM, Pastor Ralph said:

Q2. (Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church? Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry? What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

Paul demonstrating to his fellow brother's and sister's in Christ that it is better to work and earn your keep than to depend on others for his well being. By working they can help others that are in need and can not work. It is better to give than to receive. If one does not work than he should not eat.

Christians today believe that a full time pastor should be paid by the church rather than being a tentmaker type pastor. Thus he can be available to serve the church and the community. A bi-vocational can be better in his community because he is out and working among them and come to trust him. Also, he is not dependent upon the church for his support.

As stated above, Paul has given his fellow believers the example of doing work and being able to give to the needy. He also states if one does not work he should not eat, he is to earn his keep.

[Stanley Tavaziva]

2 In these verses, Paul answers a common objection: How could a loving God send anyone to hell, especially someone who has never heard about Christ? In fact, says Paul, God has revealed himself plainly in the creation to all people. And yet people reject even this basic knowledge of God. Also, all people have an inner sense of what God requires, but they choose not to live up to it. Put another way, people’s moral standards are always better than their behavior. If people suppress God’s truth in order to live their own way, they have no excuse. They know the truth, and they will have to endure the consequences of ignoring it.

What kind of God does nature reveal? Nature shows us a God of might, intelligence, and intricate detail; a God of order and beauty; a God who controls powerful forces. That is general revelation. Through special revelation (the Bible and the coming of Jesus), we learn about God’s love and forgiveness and the promise of eternal life. God has graciously given us many sources that we might come to believe in him.

People are condemned not for what they don’t know but for what they do with what they know. Those who know God’s written Word and his law will be judged by them. Those who have never seen a Bible still know right from wrong, and they will be judged because they violated those standards that their own consciences dictated. God’s law is written within them.

Many people react negatively to the fact that there is no other name than that of Jesus to call on for salvation. Yet this is not something the church decided; it is the specific teaching of Jesus himself (John 14:6). If God designated Jesus to be the Savior of the world, no one else can be his equal. Christians are to be open-minded on many issues but not on how we are saved from sin. No other religious teacher could die for our sins; no other religious teacher came to earth as God’s only Son; no other religious teacher rose from the dead. Our focus should be on Jesus, whom God provided as the way to have an eternal relationship with himself. There is no other name or way!

[Maggz]

He does not want the members of the church to see him as a burden to them.  He takes pride in the fact that he can support himself, and thereby be an example to them.

They are apt to feel that this is "second-class"  ministry - that a minister who has another job as well cannot devote sufficient time to his ministry.

He taught them that idleness was a sin - that they had been given talents which they could use to support themselves.   He also taught them not to look to others for support, but to be self-reliant.

[Irmela]

(Acts 18:3; 20:34-35; 2 Thessalonians 3:6-10; 1 Corinthians 4:12) Why does Paul earn his living by skilled labor rather than through offerings from the church?

No one can turn to him and point a finger saying that he was lazy and took offerings as an excuse not to do/perform manual labour. He worked for his keep. He did not rely on others to fend for him. In working for his keep he could also mingle easier with the ones he wanted to reach for Christ. 

Why do you think Christians believe that "full-time Christian ministry" is better than bi-vocational ministry?

Possibly that the person is then free to move around wherever he is needed and whenever without being bound by secular "strings" as it were. The danger with this is expecting the person to be on duty 24/7. At the beck and call of all and sundry. Wisdom also is needed. 

What lessons did Paul teach the believers by his example of working for his living?

He taught that we are not to just expect to be fed and not work for our food or needs to be met, just because. 

[Krissi]

Pastor Ralph mentioned that almsgiving was a habit among Jews/Christians but not among the Greeks. Corinth was a very secular city, perhaps with few or only unconverted Jews in it so Paul would have been a burden to the poorer and newer Christians who were not used to supporting a minister. But ... wasn't Corinth wealthy? PResumably there would have been wealthy converts for whom taking care of Paul's needs would not have been difficult.

Paul's habit, as we've learned, was to go to the jewish synagogues first, make converts among the Jews, then go to the God-fearing non-Jews who hung out at the synagogues, and lastly go to those with no connection to Jews such as the secular Greeks trading in the marketplace. I believe he kept up this sequence wherever he went.

I wonder if Paul worked everywhere he went, or only in some places.  Did he work when witnessing to Jews, or only when in very secular environments?

I doubt Jews would have looked down on Paul for NOT working. In fact, being a non-working rabbi could have given him status; we know that Paul was not averse to claiming rank when it suited his needs. Furthermore, he praised believers when they were generous. He praised those who gave out of need, not excess. So Paul didn't have a problem with Christians supporting him in self-sacrificial ways, and perhaps thought it would develop character and maturity in them to do so.

Could it be the case that in Corinth he simply couldn't raise enough to support himself, and thus out of expedience, needed to work?  

==

There's a mystique, of sorts, that hovers around people who are committed and passionate about whatever they're doing, such as artists who never leave their studios, etc. Their focus sets them apart from the ordinary person. This applies to pastors. I've been reading missionary bios and have been struck by how willing they were to even die to get the gospel message out -- William Carey comes to mind. Carey did worry about money but was provided for. In fact, the "highest" faith could be one that trusts God for all provision, asking nothing of other christians -- George Mueller comes to mind.

Why didn't Paul just pray for provision, as did George Mueller? God promises to provide for us, after all, and Paul wasn't a slouch -- his work was demanding and he was busy all the time, so it's not like Paul was lazy. Also, Paul could have spent that time on more ministerial pursuits. More people could have been saved. Certainly Paul had the faith to believe in God's constant and secure provision. The lesson Paul taught the new converts could have been that God dependably provides, but instead they had to learn not to be lazy ... first. 

--

This bring up the question of bivocational ministers. I didn't know that in most places in the world Christian clergy works on the side and that only in "wealthy" Western countries are ministers expected to work only in their ministry. In countries with a state church, the government provides salaries. It's clear what the people who run Western governments think of ministers -- they're paid poorly!

I don't know what to think. I'm troubled by the practice of taking "love offerings" for speakers because i have no way of making certain that my gifts are being appropriately used ... I don't want to contribute to building a landing strip for an charismatic healer who believes God wants him/her to have a plane, for example. I want to give, but only prayerfully and responsibly. Thus, I want to observe the person to whom I give which means he/she has to stick around.

Looking at this from the other direction, as a woman who may go into full-time Christian work soon, I'd rather NOT ask people for food money, but depend on God alone. But, do I have the faith for this? Am I willing to unintentionally "fast" because my faith didn't rise to the level of His provision? Should I live off my savings or work on the side if God doesn't provide for me ... such faithlessness on my part! Lastly, by asking people for donations, am I not making myself vulnerable to their demands and potentially changing my ministry to meet their vision, not God's?