A man named David left a comment on an old post of mine (here). This is my response.
David,
You are lucky. I typically do not respond to comments with a post. However, your comment actually hit on something I am passionate about for many reasons. Here is your comment:
I think all Pastors should have a regular job like the rest of the members do. Besides, there is no need for a Pastor to have to study 10 hours a day for a sermon, come on, if a Pastor is called by God then the sermons will come to him from the Holy Spirit. Show me in the Bible where being a Pastor is a full time job. All of the Apostles & even Jesus had a regular occupation, but still found time to preach. Man created the occupation of Pastor not God. The only folks in the Bible who had full time Pastori jobs were the Pharisees & you know how we all feel about them. I know this is going to piss off a lot of so called Men of God, but search deep into your heart & you’ll find it to be true. How can you tithe with money you did not sweat to earn. You’re just tithing from the collection of the congregation, not from what you worked to earn. It should be a privilege to serve God not a job to serve God. Jesus didn’t live off of what was collected, he was a Carpenter by trade. That is the spirit of mammon that makes you say Pastors should be paid. Be an example to the working man & get a real job, then folks might take you more serious in church. I’m not a Pastor, but I do my fair share of preaching the gospel in my workplace & elsewhere outside the church. I don’t consider it work because I don’t charge people to hear God’s word. To me, this is where the churches are failing because most of the money collected in them are catering to the Pastors & others getting paid in the church. If all the Elders & Pastors of the world would hold down real jobs & tithe their 10%, then you would see a huge growth in all the churches. Sorry if I offended anybody, but the truth hurts don’t it?
I would normally take each of your points and respond to them in paragraph form. Instead, I am going to counter them with bullet points and wrap this up with a simple conclusion. Here are my “counters” if you will:
- I, like you, believe it is beneficial for a pastor to spend some time working a “regular” job. It keeps them connected with the world.
- The Holy Spirit works through people who are well prepared to preach as well as those who study. Ten hours a day seems a little too much for me.
- Your “fact” Jesus and his Apostles had a full time job while doing full time ministry is not proven in Scripture. It is not said that Jesus or His twelve had full time jobs. Paul said a man should profit from his work, and we should not “muzzle the ox” meaning, we should pay those who teach over us (1 Tim 5:18). Working for the Gospel is a blessed work, but still a hard work. (Side Note: There was one point where Paul did not wish to be a burden to a poor church so he made his own income by making tents. Another point in Paul’s ministry he refused pay while with the Corinthians. He did not want them to feel they could dictate what he preached because they were paying him.)
- There is no such thing as a “spirit of mammon.”
- Does the “source” of tithe money count that much? I would imagine it was our obedience to Jesus that mattered, not where our money came from.
- You are ignorant of our circumstances. I am bi-vocational. I have a “real” job and at this point receive no pay from the church. What’s important is, the GOSPEL does the work and that is what I preach. Our church does not rely on the power of man and his speaking ability, but on the power of the Gospel alone.
- If someone came to our church to preach and did not devote at least ten hours of study and another 10-15 (or more, a lot more) in prayer, I would not allow him near a pulpit or a microphone.
- I know some churches have some bad financial guidelines. It is our prayer that God guides our income and outflow of all money earned and collected.
Here is what I am worried about most.
David, we could argue for hours on end about this. You could quote Barna and Viola and I could quote the Bible. We could fight until we were blue in the face. This is the internet, after-all. I am only going to spend time on this today, and today only. The half hour I have spent formulating and writing this, as well as any responses to any comments left today will be the end of my time covering this.
Pride is the main issue here. I am assuming you are of the male gender by your name, so I will use a bit of a harsher hand to admonish you. Your comment seeks only to divide the church and to suck up valuable time which could be used to further the Gospel. You left a comment on here which sought to show off your knowledge and to degrade others who have been called by God to be full time pastors. You used harsh language in your critique and left a rather smug parting shot (“truth hurts…”) which only shows you are guilty of the sin that haunts us all, pride.
I pray God works in your life and sanctifies you through His power. If He has not saved you yet, I pray He will. He sent His son to die a glorious, yet excruciating death on a cross so our sins, even those of pride, could be forgiven and we could be given the right to be called sons and daughters of God. He rose again to conquer death and to usher in His kingdom. He was our propitiation which took God’s wrath in our place.
He did not do this so we could show how knowledgeable we are or so we could argue about full time pay as pastors. He did this so he could “call all men unto himself” that His elect might be saved.
I pray this becomes your mission; to preach the Gospel at all opportunities. To disciple men who would do God’s will in our broken and cursed world. While the truth hurts, it is also the means by which we find true freedom.
In His peace and by His mercy,
-Don-
As an academic, I find it difficult to take anyone seriously about any subject in which they haven't spent a great deal of time studying. If I were to choose to attend a church, I would require someone to lead it who understands not only the Bible, but extra biblical sources as well, and most certainly the historical context of the teachings. Context is key to understanding anything.
I agree, context is immensely important. This is not just in Scripture, but in historical context as well.
As for being called by the Holy Spirit to spread the word: I attended a baptism yesterday and, as it would be rude to leave right afterword, sat through their services. I was bored out of my mind. The minister quoted the bible out of context, and used one account of the crucifixtion over another, which isn't a big deal except he was using a contradictory piece of evidence to make a point.
As a teacher, I have difficulty not judging any circumstances in which a person attempts to transfer knowledge from a teaching perspective. I feel they failed as an educator due to the method of instruction.
Now, under the logic described by David, the presentation should have been flawless as it was not the man before me, but the Holy Spirit in charge of that day's worship. If it had been flawless, why did I leave feeling unmoved and like I wasted my time?
One thing about David's comment, and I should allow him to speak for himself, is that he has taken the teachings of George Barna (yes, the survey guy) and Frank Viola to heart. These are some of the many points made in the book they co-authored. I have yet to get my hands on the book and have read several chapters at book stores (I refuse to buy it new as I do not with to support them).
The points they make in the book appear to be non-contextual and proof-texted.
Ugh, this is anti-intellectualism at it's best. Do people really think that Jesus just winged it when he preached his sermons? Those who do misunderstand the world in which Jesus grew up and are unwittingly robbing Jesus of his humanity. I believe that Jesus was an ardent student of the scriptures as boy and into his manhood. Most young men had the first five books of the OT memorized by the time they were 12. The best of the best had the whole OT memorized. I'd be willing to bet Jesus, as a boy, had the whole OT memorized. If you remember when Jesus was a boy, he visited Jerusalem with his family during Passover and while at the Temple, he was amazing the teachers of the law with his questions and answers regarding the scripture. I don't believe that just because Jesus was the Son of God, that he didn't have to study, and study hard, to gain those insights. Yes, I also believe that because He was the Son of God, he has a unique connection with the Spirit and the Father, but to say that the Jesus wasn't studied up on scripture is to deny his humanity. While it's true that Jesus was a carpenter, there is absolutely no record that Jesus continued to be a carpenter after beginning his ministry. In fact, many of the women who were his disciples provided for him and the rest of the disciples out of their means (Luke 8:1-3). Why would these women be providing for Jesus if he was still working a regular job? The evidence overwhelming crushes David's arguments.
Just because abuse has occurred in an area, such as the payment of pastors, does not mean we abandon the practice. People abuse sex all the time; under David's logic, we should ban sex completely. Might as well ban alcohol while we're at it. You know, really, we all ought to work for free. Why should just Pastor's be singled out to work for free. Paul says that whatever we do, we should do for the glory of God. So now, not only is it a joy to pastor a church to the praise of God, it's a joy to punch a clock or pound a keyboard to the praise of God. David is making false distinctions between secular and spiritual. Everything is spiritual. And if Pastoral work should be done pro bono, so should filing out TPS reports.
~sdg
Wait,
Are you suggestion Prohibition makes a comeback?
Yes. I'm advocating old-school fence-building legalism. No more booze for the good Friar.
Don, great post. Answering David does not concern me, but hearing your thoughts on bi-vocational pastors was of value for me. I've often wondered about such things.
I've heard some good arguments and methods for making all pastors bi-vocational. Everything from splitting churches up so that they are so small it only takes one man working part time to pastor them, to keeping pastors on a revolving teaching schedule so that each preaches for period then goes back to work in the "real world."
But I've ignored the arguments because…well…you hit it on the head – the gospel is central here, not man. I'm not nearly so concerned with whether or not all pastors should/can be bi-vocational as I am whether or not churches live the gospel.
On a side note: If bi-vocational pastors was a serious issue, don't you think Paul might have made that a clear point when writing to Titus or Timothy? You can't say that Paul didn't mention them because pastoral wages were not an issue in his day because Paul did mention his own wages.
Good post, Don. I'll be one of the first to say that I think you could do so much more in pastoring your church if it could afford to pay you full time. You are called to be a witness to the world, but to pastor THE CHURCH. You have A flock to shepherd, not the world. When I hear people downplay the role of a pastor being full-time it is a bit annoying. Yes, there has certainly been pastors who have abused this PRIVILEGE, but so has CEO's and we don't tell them to stop getting paid full time. I know, a pastor is not a CEO, but you get my point. There's a lot of work involved and people need to understand that.
But hey… at least this dude signed his name to his comment!