Inventing a Christian America

Today, March 1st, is Super Tuesday.  11 states hold primaries today to determine their preference for a presidential candidate within each political party.   Typically the outcomes of each states voting represents a presidential candidate's first test of national electability. Convincing wins in Super Tuesday primaries have usually propelled candidates to their party's nomination.

Political elections are as much about those doing the electing as it is about those eventually elected to office. Think about it, if each vote represents what a voter believes and hopes for, then the person elected is really a magnification of the desires voters happen to have at that point in time.

This is why national elections are so fascinating. Every four years, Americans collectively paint and present to the world a picture that communicates their aspirations and fears. It is a picture that enables us to see the character of a nation.  Every four years candidates are going to “fix” the problems of America, just like every candidate in all the prior elections have been going to do.  Something is wrong with that picture, as it would seem that no problems are ever really fixed, or not fixed right as a new crop of political saviors would project.

Growing up in America, you learn early on that the land of the free and home of the brave considers itself to be a Christian nation.  This assertion is not simply drawn from the presumption that America has many self-professing Christians living within its borders, it is born of America’s identity as a whole, its history and its destiny are somehow tied to Christianity.

Political leaders feel the need to appear Christian, say Christian-sounding things, [Two Corinthians..?] show up at Christian institutions, and end their speeches with “God Bless America!” American money proclaims “In God we Trust.” What could be more Christian than that?

The current election cycle is demonstrating once again that the rhetoric and mythology of a uniquely Christian America should come to an end. Why? Because the votes don’t lie.  Though voters may speak piously and rather vaguely about Christian values and ideals, polls and election results communicate clearly that this is a nation consumed by fear, anger, suspicion, and racial divisions – none of which are Christian virtues.  

If voters were serious about presenting to the world a picture of a Christian America, they would need to be painting with the colors of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, fidelity, gentleness and self-control, because these are the colors that, as the Apostle Paul said in Galatians chapter 5, give convincing evidence of harmony with Jesus Christ and the power of God at work in American lives.

Of course, Americans and their leaders will continue to speak in the name of God, even profess grand things about God, as they make their case for American Exceptionalism and the righteousness of the American Way. But from a scriptural point of view, this rhetoric is all rubbish. What matters is not what you say but how you live.  And from a Christian point of view, nothing matters more than living a life that is inspired by God’s love for everyone. (1 Corinthians chapter 13)

In Matthew’s gospel (chapter 25) readers are taken to the time when God judges all the nations of the world. It is a rather terrifying scene because many of the people present at this judgement are convinced that they are the legitimate inheritors of the Kingdom of God.

But God is not fooled. God simply asks... Did you feed the hungry, offer drink to the thirsty, welcome the stranger, clothe the naked, care for the sick and visit those in prison?

How will America fare in this time of judgment, especially when we admit as evidence the  millions of Americans (many of them children and the elderly) who do not have enough good food to eat, or the millions of Americans who have to drink water polluted with lead and industrial/agricultural pollutants?  

What about the refugees and immigrants who are being refused at our borders and made to feel unwelcome in our land, or the homeless, many of them ill, who do not have a home and proper shelter from the elements, or the prison inmates, many of them African American, who are treated like the garbage of society?  See, in America it does matter where you live and what color you are and how much money you have.  The people of color in Flint Michigan with lead poisoned water are far less important than the people of Malibu California.

God is asking the nations about their public policy, not their verbal piety, because the true test of Christianity has only ever been and always will be... the test of love.

Imagine a political leader saying, “If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing” (1 Corinthians 13:1-2).

Love or noise? Love or nothing? Christianity hinges on how people choose between them. If Americans were serious about being a Christian nation, they would call forth and elect leaders who are patient and kind, and never boastful or rude. They would demand a political process much less characterized by vitriol and noise.  But for that to happen, the people who vote would themselves need to espouse the virtues of love.  You see, we don’t get the opposite of who we are... we get exactly a reflection of our own core values.  That’s why this years political candidates are woefully insufficient to the tasks of inspiring and pristine leadership. Ain’t pretty but its true!

America, BE who you are and tell it like it really is.  Or, look in the mirror, change, and start living what you say you are... a Christian nation!  Contemplating an end to the rhetoric of a “Christian America,” is not the same as suggesting an end to Christianity in America. 

However, the violence and hate, and the greed and the lack of sympathy for those deemed to be threatening minorities, all those outside the prevailing majority who make the rules, strongly suggest that now is precisely the time for a sustained re-infusion of God’s love in our American foundations.  

But for that love to be genuinely Christian, and not a projection of our own fear, anxiety  or arrogance, citizens are going to have to separate once and for America’s true nature from true Christian ideals. They are not the same thing.

The Names of God... Can We Change them to suit our needs?

Does God care what we call Him? A valid question when considering all the turmoil over  whether Muslims and Christians worship the same god.  Some even are suggesting that maybe a new name is needed for God. 

For some time now, feminist theologians and a host of others have suggested that Christians should consider new names for God. One denomination went so far as to affirm names like “Giver, Gift and Giving” in place of the “Father, Son and Holy Spirit” to be used in worship. Feminist theologians have demanded that masculine pronouns and names for God be replaced with female or gender-neutral terms. But to change the name of God is to redefine the God we reference. Trifling with the name of God is no small matter.

Let’s be clear, God takes His name very seriously, and the Ten Commandments include the command that we must not take the name of the Lord in vain. We are to use the names God has given for Himself, and we are to recognize that God takes His name seriously because He desires to be rightly known by His human creatures. 

We cannot truly know Him if we do not even know His proper name.  Moses understood this. When he encountered the call of God that came from the burning bush, Moses asked God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” (Exodus 3:13). God answered Moses, “I Am who I Am” (Exodus 3:14). God told Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘The Lord, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations” (Exodus 3:15).

As these verses make clear, we are not to tamper with God’s name. We are to use the names that God has named Himself, and we are to recognize that any confusion about the name of God will lead to confusion about the nature of God, and will quickly devolve into some form of idolatry.

Christians must keep this central principle from the Bible constantly in mind when we think about Islam.

Several years ago, a bishop in the Netherlands attracted controversy when he argued that Christians should call God “Allah” in order to lower theological tensions between the two religions. He also argued that calling God “Allah” would be commonplace in Christian churches within a century and that this would lead to a synthesis of Islam and Christianity.

In the Bible, God reveals Himself to us in many names. These names are His personal property. We did not invent these names for God. To the contrary, God revealed these names to a human as His own.

We have no right to modify or to revise these names—much less to reject or modify them in an attempt to ease religious tensions. 

Muslims do not speak of God as their heavenly Father as do Christians. In the Islamic faith, Allah is not only a different name for god; the deity it designates is far more impersonal than the God of the Bible. Father—the very name that Jesus gave us as the designated name for use in prayer—is a name that simply does not fit Allah as depicted in the Quran.

Christianity and Islam have serious differences. For example, Muslims claim that Allah has no son. This represents a head-on collision between the God of the Bible and the god known as Allah. The Bible makes clear, the one and only true God is most perfectly revealed as the Father of the Son, Jesus Christ. In the Gospel of John, Jesus repeatedly teaches that no one has truly known the Father, except by seeing and knowing the Son. In one of the most clarifying verses in the New Testament, Jesus declared Himself to be “the way, and the truth, and the life,” adding, “No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

As mentioned briefly in my last article, Muslims deny that God has a son, and therefore explicitly reject any Trinitarian language. From the very starting point, Islam denies what Christianity takes as its central truth: that Jesus Christ is the only begotten of the Father. If Allah has no son, then Allah is not the God who reveals Himself through the Son as presented in the Bible. How then can calling God “Allah” not lead to anything but confusion—and worse?

Islam teaches that the doctrine of the Trinity is blasphemous. But the Christian faith is essentially Trinitarian. The Bible reveals that the Father is God, that the Son is God, and that the Holy Spirit is God. Jesus is not merely a prophet, as acknowledged by Muslims, He is God in human flesh. This is precisely what Islam rejects.

The Trinitarian language is the language of the Bible, and it is essential to Christianity. Indeed, the Christian faith points to Christ and announces that we can only know the Father through the Son. Confusing the God of the Bible with Allah of the Quran is not only a mistake, it is a dangerous distortion of the Gospel of Christ.

The Trinitarian nature of God is embedded within the Great Commission. Jesus tells His disciples to go into the world and make disciples of all nations and to baptize them “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). Christians are those who bear the names of God even in our baptism, and those names are Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

God takes His name with great seriousness, and so must we. Thankfully, we are not left in the dark, groping for adequate language. God has revealed His names to us, so that we can rightly know Him. We are not called to be clever or creative in referring to God, only faithful and accurate.

We are living in challenging days. One of the most pressing challenges of our times is the task of speaking rightly about God. This is particularly challenging when Christians encounter Muslims, but it is also a challenge when Christians encounter secular people in Western cultures. But this really isn’t a new challenge. It was the same challenge faced by the children of Israel as they encountered the Canaanites, and the same challenge faced by the Apostle Paul at Mars Hill.

Our challenge is to speak truthfully about God, and the only way we can do that is to use the names God gave Himself. The God of the Bible is not Allah, and Allah is not the God of the Bible. Any confusion about that undermines our usefulness as HIS witnesses and taints the power of the very Gospel we preach.

Do Christians and Muslims Worship the Same God... only by a different name?

It is true that the three primary monotheistic faiths, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all believe in an eternal, uncreated Creator God to whom all human beings must one day give an accounting of their life. But it is self-evident that Muslims and Christians do not worship the same God.

The Muslim and Christian views of God do have some similarities. Christians believe in one eternal God Who created the universe, and Muslims apply the same attributes to Allah. Both view God as all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-present. 

A critical difference between the Islamic and Christian views of God is the biblical concept of the Trinity. In the Bible, God has revealed Himself as one God in three Persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. While each Person of the Trinity is fully God, God is not three gods but three in one.  Islam denies the Trinity and accuses Christians of teaching polytheism or multiple gods.

Islam is hostile towards the Trinity as evidenced by this passage from the Quran, 5:73 (Yusuf Ali), “They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.”  As you can see, Islam denies that God is a Trinity, and in fact uses such teaching as a means of fostering hostility.

Also, in Christianity Jesus, the Christ is the second person of the Trinity, who was for a time in flesh. But Islam denies this as well, in fact Allah has no son at all.  God’s Son came in the form of man, a truth called the incarnation (Luke 1:30-35; John 1:14; Colossians 2:9; 1 John 4:1-3). The Lord Jesus Christ conquered the penalty and power of sin by dying on the cross (Romans 6:23). After rising from the dead, Jesus returned to heaven to be with His Father and sent “God in the person of The Holy Spirit” to be with believers (Acts 1:8-11). One day, Christ will return to judge and rule (Acts 10:42, 43). Those who have trusted in the Lord Jesus will live with Him in His Kingdom, but those who refuse to follow Him will be separated to hell away from the Holy God. 

Again the Quran, 5:17 is opposed to such belief... "In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every--one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things."

Quran 5:75 goes further by diminishing the divinity of Christ Jesus... "Christ the son of Mary was no more than a messenger; many were the messengers that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how Allah doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!"

The Trinity is essential to the Christian faith. Without the Trinity, there would be no incarnation of God’s Son in the Person of Jesus Christ. Without Jesus Christ, there would be no salvation from sin. Without salvation, sin would condemn all to an eternal separation from God.

So, do Christians and Muslims worship the same God? A better question is, “Do Christians and Muslims both have a correct understanding of who God is?” To this question, the answer is one does and one does not. 

Because of crucial differences between the Christian and Muslim concepts of God, the two faiths cannot both be true. The Biblical God alone addresses and solves the problem of sin by giving His Son, which in-turn paves the way for a restored relationship with God and the prospect of eternal salvation.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son” (John 3:16-18).

Christians must keep these central principles from the Bible – the Trinity, the divinity of Christ and His sacrificial death on a cross for the atonement of mankind's sins constantly in mind as one considers some of the most urgent questions in the world today. We must certainly have these principles in mind when we think about Islam.

The God of the Bible, known by many names – Yahweh, Jehovah, I Am, and the god of Islam – Allah, are not the same God.  Jesus, the Christ, made this abundantly clear. In the simplest way imaginable, Jesus teaches us to know God as Father, and to use this name in prayer. The Lord’s Prayer begins with the words, “Our Father, who is in heaven.” By the grace that God has shown us in Christ, we can truly know Him as Father.

Muslims do not speak of God as their heavenly Father. In the Islamic faith, Allah is not only a different name for god; the deity it designates is far more impersonal than the God of the Bible. Father—the very name that Jesus gave us as the designated name for use in prayer—is a name that simply does not fit Allah as depicted in the Quran.

Trinitarian language is the language of the Bible, and it is essential to Christianity. Indeed, the Christian faith points to Christ and announces that we can only know the Father through the Son. Confusing the God of the Bible with Allah of the Quran is not only a mistake, it is a dangerous distortion of the Gospel of Christ.

Christianity and Islam do not believe in the same God.

Are You Hindering the Gospel?

The story is told of a preacher who was preaching in an old fashioned tent revival. During the revival, a couple young men decided to harass the preacher, in the hopes that he would pack up and leave town. So one night after the preacher had started his sermon, one of the young men stood up and asked, "Hey preacher! What's the difference between a preacher and a fool?"  Without missing a beat, the preacher responded by saying, "You two come up here and stand beside me a moment and I think the audience can see the difference." It wasn't the preacher who packed up and left. 

Of course we can get a chuckle out of a story like that, but hindering the gospel is no laughing matter. And while we may never stand up and so rudely attempt to impede the preaching of the gospel, we may be guilty of hindering it in other, more subtle ways.  For example, consider the following....

Do you think you're helping or hindering when you miss worship services, fail to attend Bible classes, criticize the preacher, the elders and song leader for their weekly "performance" and fail to financially give to the work of the church? Do you think you're helping or hindering when you whisper and gossip about others in the church family?  

We hinder the gospel when what we do fails to match what we say. When we claim to follow Christ but allow our actions to betray our words, a watching world scoffs at the gospel, and rightly so. When we claim to have been transformed by God’s grace but live as if God has made no change at all, we cause others to heap contempt on the gospel.

These are but a few of the ways that Christians hinder the gospel of Christ. Surely, Satan is having a "field day" with many professing Christians. Brethren, "Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ" (Philippians 1:27).

Realistically speaking, WE Christians are the greatest hindrance to the gospel. Thankfully, God is in charge and not us!  The Bible assures us that nothing and no person is able to hinder the gospel. It tells us to place our confidence in the God whose plans cannot be stopped. Our lack of confidence in the gospel, our indifference to it, and our unfaithfulness in spreading it, cannot truly hinder the work of God. God reigns supreme over all things, all actions and HIS purpose cannot be stopped or dulled by our failings.

His dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom endures from generation to generation;  all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?” (Daniel 4:34b-35)

      

The GREAT SIN of Hindering the Gospel

What do you call 100 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? A good start. How about 5000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?  A really great start!

Dealing with a lawyer can be similar to taking a physics exam. Why do I need to endure this suffering!?  Sometimes lawyers make discussions about law or legal matters more complex than they actually are. They also love writing out lengthy descriptions of legal procedures that defy ones ability to comprehend the meaning.

There are times when making things complex might be important, but most times simple and straight-forward is the best strategy in communicating with people.

In the days of Christ the lawyers were men who claimed to interpret divine law so as to help the Jews to understand the will of God. Actually they were a bunch of hypocritical religious bigots who deceived the people and hindered them from accepting the truth. 

Jesus strongly rebuked them for their inconsistencies and showed to them their true condition. He accused them of hindering the people from understanding God's word and from entering into the kingdom. Listen to Jesus, "Woe to you experts in the law, because you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not entered, and you have hindered those who were entering." (Luke 11:52). 

Today there are members of the church who are guilty of hindering people from obeying the gospel and are hindering the progress of the cause of Christ without even realizing what they are doing. They may not be guilty of “taking away the key of knowledge”, but by their conduct, or attitude they may be guilty of hindering others from becoming Christians, or some from becoming strong and faithful members of the church. I am sure that no one wants to be guilty of this. 

Periodically, we all need to look in the mirror, take inventory of our own lives, to see where in we might be guilty of hindering others. The apostle Paul says...  Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test? (2 Corinthians 13:5). 

Members of the church, so called Christians, who live worldly lives are a hindrance to the cause of Christ. People in the world are quick to take notice of the hypocrisy of those who claim to be Christians who do not live as Christians are expected to live. The apostle James says, You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world means enmity against God? Therefore, anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. (James 4:4). 

Again, the scriptures admonish... “Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.” (Col.3:1,2). The apostle John says, “For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. 17 The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.” (1 John 2:16,17).  A person may excuse himself by saying he is not guilty of bad things that are condemned in the scriptures, but by inspiration Paul even includes pleasures that become distractions to spiritual growth... “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God” (2 Tim 3:4). Things that are not wrong in themselves can become sin to us by keeping us from being the strong Christians the Lord wants us to be. Our Lord teaches us to “seek first the kingdom of God” (Matt. 6:33), and we are told, “Be strong in the Lord and the power of his might” (Eph. 6:10). 

Christians who show no real interest in the church are a hindrance. We are told in Hebrews 11:6 that God “is a rewarder of those who diligently seek him”. Lukewarm Christians are sickening to the Lord. Jesus said in His letter to the church at Laodicea... “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.” (Rev. 3:15-16). 

We are told in 1 Corinthians 15:57-58... “But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.  Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain.”

Members of the church who show lackluster support for the [tantamount to refusing to cooperate] Lord's work impede progress and discourage others who want to do what is right. The apostle Paul wrote to the Christians at Ephesus and said, “Endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3). In the Old Testament we are informed that “rebellion is like the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is an iniquity and idolatry” (1 Sam. 15:23). Those Christians who have no time to contribute to the success of any program of work that is decided on by the congregation’s leadership hinder and discourage others who want to cooperate and to do what they can for the Lord. Rest assured, such individuals will give account in the day of Judgment. 

People who allow trivial things to become issues for argument, or keep them from attending worship services are a detriment to those who are interested and want to do right.  A strong church cannot be built on weak Christians. There are three classes of church members: (1) Those who will, (2) Those who won't, (3) Those who might. 

The first class, “those who will” can be depended on. They are the backbone of the church. They are the ones who will be present every time the church meets (if at all possible). They do not rely on excuses to justify poor church attendance or lack of personal service these people are “ready for every good work”. If there is anything they can do to help the church, they are ready and willing. You can depend on them. They are a good example to all, including the conduct of their children. They are a source of encouragement to all others. 

The second class, “those who won’t” cannot be depended on. They are the ones who will do no more than they have to do to still be recognized as a part of the congregation. They refuse to attend more than one service a week, if that. They will not sacrifice any of their personal pleasure time to help do anything for the church. They are selfish, thinking only of themselves and their own interests above all else. They do only the bare minimum, but do expect the Lord in the day of Judgment to say to them, “Well done, good and faithful servant. Enter into the joy of the Lord.”  Good luck with that idea!

The third class is made up of “people who might” be available and interested. They might or might not show up to help on a day planned for general cleaning up around the building and property. They might or they might not attend when the congregation conducts a revival weekend to help strengthen the church and save sinners. If they don't "have other fish to fry" they might show up for a service or two to see what is going on, but not get too involved. 

These are people who could change classes by making up their mind that they want to be more useful to the church and start taking advantage of opportunities to be made spiritually stronger. These are people who could decide that they want their spiritual life to count for something before they die. They could decide that they are going to use their abilities and talents for the Lord so that their lives will have meaning. Or,  the third class, “the might class” can change and become part of the second class... the won’t class”. Of course, this would be a bad decision, but sometimes people decline instead of growing. No one is responsible for this but the individual person. Such people will frequently blame others for their plight, but in the day of Judgment such will be judged as an individual as all will. 

Finally, members of the church who refuse to put into practice the truths they learn from the Bible are a detriment to the cause of Christ because by their influence they discourage others who want to be solidly grounded in Biblical truth without ungodly interference. The apostle James said this about such ones... “ If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them.” (James 4:17). This same apostle says. “Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. (James 1:22). Again. he says, “But whoever looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues in it—not forgetting what they have heard, but doing it—they will be blessed in what they do.”(James 1:25). 

No one wants to be guilty of hindering anyone from becoming a Christian, and no one wants to discourage anyone from doing his best to serve the Lord in all ways possible. So ask yourself... What are you going to do to improve your influence? It would be a terrible thing to hear our Lord’s condemnation in the Day of Judgment when He will say to those who have “HINDERED the GOSPEL... “Depart from me into everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels!” 

Let us do the best we can to serve the Lord and encourage others to do the same. It will all be worth it in the Day of Judgment and for all eternity. 

Robbing Peter to pay Paul

Don’t misunderstand my article last week, I was not saying it is a sin for preachers to take compensation from a church.  All I am saying is that 1 Corinthians 9:14 cannot be used to defend the practice of paying a regular ongoing salary.

Taking a salary as a minister is a choice, as is deciding not to take a salary. Each person must decide for themselves which way of living will be of most benefit to the gospel of Jesus Christ and to the people whom they seek to serve.  

Maybe the command was not primarily for the one preaching the gospel, but for those who were receiving the benefit from the teacher. That is, the command is for the hearers. Certainly generosity plays a significant part in this equation. A local congregation was indeed expected to provide for someone, particulary a visitor, doing the teaching. If the one doing the teaching and preaching turned down gifts, that was fine, as Paul the Apostle did. 

There were times when the Apostle Paul experienced extenuating circumstances beyond his control where, due to the likely dire nature of the situation at hand, he was forced to accept support from local Christians, who for the most part in that time and age were impoverished people.  One could call such support “wages”. This was clearly not his normal operating procedure and he considered this support to be akin to “robbery”. Strong words, and words we rarely ever hear in the discussion of compensation for the preaching ministry.  

Paul was clear about his feelings on the matter when He said, “I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service”.   Notice what he says in 2 Corinthians 11:7-9...

(7) Have I committed an offense in abasing myself that you might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely? (8) I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service. (9) And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself. 

Some argue that Paul used the word “robbery” here because it was the Corinthians responsibility, not the Macedonian's responsibility to support him. Not the case at all. 

Paul's strong general teachings against collecting money from the church simply does not support this view. Also, some argue that 1 Corinthians chapter 9 is referring only to a special isolated case or a special set of circumstances where Paul took extra care not to offend the Corinthian church due to alleged unique problems that were going on with this church, that if not for these problems, Paul would have gladly collected money from them. They claim that this was his normal way of operating. Not so. Paul's teachings on the subject of collecting money from churches demonstrate the exact opposite and he provides an excellent example for all churches to follow.

All in all, Paul expounded and lived what we could call, “the better way”. We know from other Scriptures that Paul was not lazy as are so many so-called “pastors” today. 

He was not a nosy busybody poking around in everyone's personal business, meddling in things that were none of his concern. Within his God-given calling, the Apostle Paul was not like so many modern day ministers who operate outside of their scope of pastoral authority, which is supposed to be to care for the flock by watching, warning and preaching the truth from the Bible – not creating or promoting man–made doctrines and commands, especially so when such “commands” are directly beneficial. 

Even a brief perusal of the New Testament Epistles shows that Paul worked hard to support himself, to be generous and have something to share with others, not to take from others as is so common today. It is also clear that he only accepted sporadic financial or material help from the brethren when he was in serious need or where his work in preaching the Gospel truly required some extra help. 

Paul exemplified poise and balance in the area of receiving money or material assistance as a Christian minister. Paul was a rare man of God in his own time and such committed men are even rarer in modern times.

So although there is a power or right to accept a sporadic or regular income from the Gospel, the good minister, the most faithful and trustworthy among us will simply not use this right unless there is a dire need and only after they have exhausted every other means of support at their disposal.  

In our day and age we see men “going into the ministry” as a church career with a regular income and retirement in mind.  Well this might be very normal as far as the modern church is concerned, but this is far from normal for a good minister according to what the Bible teaches, a minister who wants to present Christ in the best light and not hinder the Gospel. 

So instead of isolating verses such as 1Corinthians 9:14 out of context, as if this were some kind of mandatory “command” for preachers to receive an income from the church, Christians need to read the whole passage in context. If they have “eyes to see and ears to hear” they will hopefully understand that this is not the case at all, but rather that those who preach the Gospel have a right of support under certain special conditions or extenuating circumstances, and that to abstain is the better way so as not to hinder the Gospel. 

We have the heart of God on the matter - Jesus speaking through His Word and basically saying that He loves us and will not allow those who preach the Gospel to starve, which could be a hinderance to the precious Gospel. Through the example and inspired words of Paul, we are admonished to forgo compensation for preaching the Gospel.  Love can see this view. Greed cannot. This is one of the reasons it is so important for Christians to approach the Bible from the right perspective or they risk deceiving themselves.

By no means did Paul approve of collecting an income from the church, let alone a regular ongoing income. Paul was no hired hand and would not compromise the Gospel to appease the wishes and desires of those who might have paid him “wages”. He did not settle-in to a community, expecting a comfortable income from church members. In times where he may not have been able to find work for his hands (he was a tent maker by trade) or where various urgencies may have come up and his traveling schedule may not have permitted him to work, etc., he accepted help yet obviously would have done so very reluctantly.

Again, I am not saying that churches should not financially help a genuine minister in times of genuine need. I am arguing against incomes, regular salaries, retirement schemes, etc., based on the teachings of Scripture and Paul's excellent example. 

What Does the Bible Really Say About Salaries for Preachers?

Has God really commanded that preachers be paid a regular on-going salary for serving congregations of His Church? 

Well this is what most preachers will tell you that the Bible teaches, basing their defense on passages in 1 Corinthians chapter 9. The question that should be considered is this... has God commissioned that gospel-preachers receive financial and material support from a church family? Is that support to be an ongoing package of compensation and benefits or occasional gifts only when and if necessary?  

To begin debating this touchy subject, I would suggest reviewing what may well be the most misquoted of all Bible verses on this subject, at 1 Corinthians 9:14. It says...

In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel. 

Paul does appear to be saying that God has commanded that certain people should get paid to preach the gospel.  Most Christians believe this verse is a command to the church to provide a regular ongoing income for an evangelist – the preaching minister. 

However, is that what the passage is really saying?  I would suggest it is not.  Lets consider the entire context and you can then decide for yourself after examining the evidence.  

First, the phrase “those who preach the gospel” does not automatically refer to a pastor, evangelist or preacher. Yet it is not unusual, in fact, it is incredibly commonplace for preachers to quote this verse as if it applies exclusively to them. 

They claim that this verse is God's express command that not only empowers them, but entitles them to collect a regular income from church members, construed as mandatory, therefore church doctrine. The argument includes verse 13 which says...

Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple get their food from the temple, and that those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar?

On the surface these passages may sound like a compelling command, but is this really what the Apostle Paul is referring to? 

Actually... 1 Corinthians 9 cannot be used by preachers to defend the practice of receiving a salary. These passages are talking about traveling missionaries and other leaders who have left their home and jobs to teach and support other Christians in other towns. Since they will typically only be in a city or town for a few weeks or months, they are dependent upon the hospitality of local people in that city or town. 

Ideally, even these spiritual leaders should have “mobile professions” if possible, so like Paul, they do not have to depend on the financial aid of other people, especially when it was known that most 1st century Christian communities were poor to impoverished.

Paul does not say anything that would allude to a doctrinal command that “resident preachers” are to receive support or that the church is commanded to give such support in the form of regular compensation. 

We cannot ignore the critical cultural, historical, and biblical background material that must be considered to properly understand, interpret, and apply Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 9:14 that those who preach the gospel should get their living from the gospel. We need to understand the role of hospitality in the Hebrew and Roman culture and economy, we need to understand the law in Deuteronomy about borrowing a neighbors oxen, we need to understand the the role and purpose of traveling preachers, and above all, we need to properly understand the full scope of the gospel.

Considering the entire chapter of 1 Corinthians 9, it gives us insight into Paul’s true feeling and concern for preaching, as he was doing, of the gospel.   Paul is expounding that it would be lawful [justified] for him, and he would certainly be deserving, to accept a living from the gospel as some others were doing at the time.  But, he did not avail himself of that right or exert pressure to that end, because to do so would actually hinder the gospel.

The clincher in Paul’s reasoning comes from preceding verses 11-12, which say...

11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? 12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn’t we have it all the more?  But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.  

Many will quote verse 11 and sometimes include the first half of verse 12 to try and support receiving a regular income from the church, while completely omitting the second half of verse 12 which states: “...we did not use this right.’ On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.”

You cannot ignore part of verse 12 to support the position that Paul is saying preachers are entitled to compensation.  Not surprisingly, verses 15-18 are almost never mentioned. These verses offer even more proof of Paul's strong stand against using this basic right to pressure for any level of financial support.  Here’s what he says...

15 But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me, for I would rather die than allow anyone to deprive me of this boast. 16 For when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, since I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17 If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me. 

Paul's view culminates in verse 18:

18 What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make full use of my rights as a preacher of the gospel.

To be clear, in the second half of chapter 9, Paul puts the compensation issue from the first half of the chapter in context, focusing on evangelists/preachers having to endure all things in complete submission to the gospel, not accommodating one’s personal right to reap material benefits and make a living from the gospel.

In the context, Paul says that although it was “his right” to receive financial help from the Corinthians believers, he turned it down so as not to hinder the gospel (vs12). The responsibility is on the hearer to offer support in the form of generous gifts rather than on the teacher to demand it or even expect it.  

Paul went further, in word and deed, setting himself as an example, to clearly demonstrate that he believed one’s personal right to compensation for preaching the gospel ends where the gospel of Christ begins.  Specifically, Paul explained in the second half of the chapter that exercising rights to compensation would not only “hinder” the gospel, but also be a financial “burden” on the church.

So examining Paul’s words and actions on this issue in full context, it seems obvious that Paul wanted no part of anything that could be viewed as personal gain, including the exercising of his personal rights that could possibly harm the gospel message and be a financial burden on the church. 

And for those who point to 1 Corinthians 9:14 and say, “the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel,” the word “commanded” is also translated, “directed” in most prominent translations. Not to mention that if the Lord did in fact command such ones to e compensated, then the man He personally ordained as an Apostle and minister of the gospel – Paul – decided to make the Lord’s command just an option?   It couldn’t be sensibly argued that this is the case. Paul would never “add to or subtract” from the Lord’s commands.

The bottom line is this: If a preacher quotes 1 Corinthians 9:14 as a way to justify that the people he ministers to should pay his salary, he is using 1 Corinthians 9:14 in exactly the opposite way that Paul was using it.  Paul writes 1 Corinthians 9:14 in the context of explaining why he does not take money from the people he serves. The Apostle Paul chose to pass on his right or power to accept [exert pressure] a regular financial living from the gospel so as not to hinder the gospel. This view is simply not taught today in most Christian circles. 

Not to be missed, verse 18 also shows that Paul infers that those who collects money as a preaching minister as being those who CHARGE for the gospel. 

Think back to a time when your preacher or congregation leadership offered a fair and balanced discussion on the entire chapter 9 of 1 Corinthians?  Can’t remember? Probably because its never happen, and you have only heard the passages sited which support the view that its a congregations commanded duty to pay a preacher.

Preaching has become a lucrative profession for many who have the skills to perform in this role.  Many are either poorly qualified, falling prey to greed or quickly ensnared by the dependence that comes from “secular-like” compensation packages, that ultimately strain church finances and focus more on the “man’s needs” than the gospel.

Does paying a preacher really impeed the gospel?  Some would argue that without a preacher the gospel will suffer in a local community.  Who will preach and teach?  Others would say that the resources used to compensate a preacher would be better spent in outward evangelism which would increase the spreading of the Word.  Its pretty hard to make an argument that would discredit the use of financial resources more completely in preaching the gospel (Acts1:8).  After all, every Christian is to be preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the gospel knows no boundaries... to the ends of the earth we are to go.  

Sadly, most of us don’t do that at all or not very well, because we have abdicated that Biblical command (Matthew 28:19-20) to a paid preacher.  Christians have made it evangelism by proxy.

Next time... So if salaried compensation is not commanded for a preacher, what should we do to help them?