What does the Bible say about "full-time" minister work?

Is a full-time, itinerant, "faith-supported" ministry biblical or relevant?

Such a ministry is biblical and therefore relevant, since the God-breathed Word fully equips us for every age and circumstance (2 Timothy 3:16, 17)." TARGET="_blank">2 Timothy 3:16, 17). The Spirit separated Barnabas and Saul to a distinct work (Acts 13:1-4)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 13:1-4). While Paul had reasons for doing secular work in Corinth and Ephesus (Acts 18:3; 20:34;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 18:3; 20:34; 1 Corinthians 9:12, 15;" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 9:12, 15; 2 Corinthians 11:12)," TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 11:12), the norm is "that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel" (1 Corinthians 9:14)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 9:14). It was therefore appropriate that he and Barnabas would forbear from secular work (verse 6). The gospel was their full-time work. Their’s was an itinerant ministry. Likewise, Timothy and other young men traveled with Paul (Acts 20:4)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:4). Although the work had progressed for several decades, there were still itinerant preachers whom Gaius faithfully helped (3 John 5-8)." TARGET="_blank">3 John 5-8). Such men - then and now - consolidate, unify, and further the work of God by moving among existing assemblies and into new work. Timothy and Titus stayed for extended periods in locations that needed assistance. These were temporary assiguments in which they served along with other local men.

The New Testament pattern is that such work received support through the voluntary offerings of assemblies (2 Corinthians 11:8;" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 11:8; Philippians 4:14-16)" TARGET="_blank">Philippians 4:14-16) and individual believers (1 Corinthians 16:17)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 16:17). To reduce support to a contractual basis lowers the spiritual character of Christian giving and robs the worker of a singular dependence on His Master for all his needs.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What is there a difference in the genealogy of Matthew and Luke?

Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke differ?

Matthew presents the credentials of the King. The genealogy of Matthew 1" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 1 traces His lineage through David and Solomon. David typifies the "King of Glory," strong and mighty in battle (Psalm 24:8)," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 24:8), and Solomon typifies the glorious reign of the "King of peace" (Hebrews 7:2)," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 7:2), the eternal Son of God (verse 3).

Luke presents a perfect Man Whose pathway leading to Calvary was the revelation of the heart of God (Luke 1:78)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 1:78). Matthew portrays Him as the "Seed of David;" Luke describes the virgin-bom "Seed of the Woman." Luke's genealogy traces Him through David's son, Nathan, not Solomon. Throughout this list, "son" is not in the text except in verse 23 where "as it was supposed" qualifies it. In every other case, Luke says, "of Heli, of..." until he says, "of Adam, of God," "the Son of God" (in the singular and with the article, this is used only of the Lord).

Matthew lists the genealogy of Joseph. Luke gives us the genealogy of Mary. Through Joseph legally and Mary personally, the despised Jesus of Nazareth was truly "born King of the Jews."

N. Crawford

Other pages in this section

About this site

How do we reconsile God's election and man's free will?

ELECTION
Some have become concerned as regards their unsaved relatives and the doctrine of election; they cannot understand how the difficulty of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility is to be met.

That, however, is a poor reason for not believing them both. We do not need to range ourselves in men’s categories and take sides with Arminians, those who hold the responsible freedom of man’s will, or with Calvinists who believe equally firmly in God’s sovereignty; we believe in both, not as a mixture, but as entireties.

If our gospel is limited or hampered by views of God’s sovereignty, we may be sure that we hold it wrongly.

As has been said, we pray as though all depended on God’s grace; we preach as though all hinged on man’s faith. Really the difficulty need not trouble us. It meets us, if we think of it, in every action of our life. Certainly God is Sovereign; “Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world” (Acts 15: 18)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 15: 18). God knows what will happen; He forsees; He chooses; He disposes. What can we do therefore? What is to be, will be. “We must wait for Him” to do all. On the contrary, we know we have a responsibility to fulfil and no accusations of Arminianism need turn us aside.

Let us take a simple illustration:—Supposing we have friends returning to the homeland from U.S.A.; but within sight of land the ship catches fire and everyone on board is in great peril. Now nothing is more certain than that God knows all, who will be saved and who will not be, but will that deter the most convinced Calvinist from seeking to bring help to those in danger and straining every nerve to reach them in time? We ask God’s help, and we thank Him when our friends are brought safely to land, but if everyone sheltered behind the purposes of God, and sat down and did nothing, then most probably those in danger would be lost. Now, if we would not act like this in temporal affairs, why do so in spiritual things? We are not called to examine the book of God’s decrees, but by prayer and effort to bring our relatives under the sound of the Gospel. The Lord did not send His disciples to preach election to every creature, nor the Gospel to all the elect (for we do not know who they are), but the Gospel to every creature. When Paul thanked God for the election of the Thessalonians in chap. i. 4 of the first Epistle, he did not cite some wonderful vision or spiritual experience through which they had passed, to justify this conviction, but he based it on: (1) the way they received the Gospel, and (2) the effects of the Gospel on their lives, summed up in verse 9 as “turning to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven.” Generally when man’s responsibility and God’s electing grace are mentioned on the same page of Scripture, it is the former that comes first. Thus in John 5:40" TARGET="_blank">John 5:40 the Lord said to the Jews, “Ye will not come unto Me that ye might have life” (not ye cannot), and in the following chapter (v. 44) we hear His words, “No man can come to Me, except the Father, which hath sent Me, draw him.” See also Acts 13:46," TARGET="_blank">Acts 13:46, “Seeing ye put it (the Word of God) from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles”; and then two verses on, “As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” In Acts 18: 8," TARGET="_blank">Acts 18: 8, “Many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed, and were baptized,” and in v. 10, “I have much people in this city.”

We must not limit the Gospel message as a bona fide proclamation of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection as the means of salvation, available for all, for “God wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth,” and “Christ gave Himself a ransom for all,” that “whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life”; and the last message in the Scriptures to the unsaved is, “Let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will let him take the water of life freely.” Those who have believed the Gospel and who have the humble confidence that they are amongst God’s chosen ones, give glory to Him alone, and seek to make their calling and election sure. Perhaps there was never a more direct and specific promise from God of safety to any company than to Paul’s ship-companions: “There shall be no loss of any man’s life among you.” “God hath given thee all them that sail with thee”; and Paul added, “I believe God.” This was God’s sovereign act (Acts 27:22-25)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 27:22-25), but in verse 31 —when the sailors were about to flee out of the ship—Paul uttered the warning words, “Except these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved.” This gives the human responsibility side, to which both saint and sinner should give good heed. It should be understood that this reply is limited to the subject of the question before us, and hardly touches on the great subject of the eternal counsels from the believer’s standpoint.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Can we interpret dreams?

Are there consistent principles for understanding our dreams?

Dreams are one of ways in which God speaks to His servants, through His servants, and also to the unconverted.

God speaks in dreams consistent with His purposes and plans. We have three principles: interpretation; confirmation; and prevention by warning.

We observe that in the Biblical revelation He spoke in dreams when the Word of God was incomplete.

God revealed His purposes through dreams to Joseph, Jacob, and Gideon.

God warns in dreams as He did with the Magi and Joseph in the New Testament.

God uses dreams to awaken realities in the unregenerate. The butler and the baker (Genesis 40)," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 40), and Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2)" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 2) are classic examples. Job 33:14," TARGET="_blank">Job 33:14, 15 confirms this. To the unregenerate, the principle of interpretation is needed.

It is interesting to note that Job, in his dilemma, speaks of being "scared" by dreams (Job 7:14)" TARGET="_blank">Job 7:14) and the wise king in Ecclesiastes 5:7" TARGET="_blank">Ecclesiastes 5:7 contrasts the vanities of dreams with the fear of God.

In His sovereignty, God can still speak by dreams in order to reach sinners; however, wisdom is needed since we have the completed Word of God! A believer could get upset by dreams and have doubts. Let such rest assured that the Scriptures are our ONLY foundation for spiritual and eternal matters; put no confidence in dreams!

We can be sure that God does not save in dreams. It would be the exception when God uses dreams to awaken eternal realities in the subconscious mind. We must be absolutely clear that our faith rests in nothing outside the written Word of God.

A. Hull
Other pages in this section

About this site

Should believers take a letter of recommendation when visiting other assemblies?

Is it right for an assembly to receive to its fellowship one coming from a distance, without a letter of commendation, and Should such one be allowed to partake of the supper?

The use of letters of commendation is a most scriptural one. Paul recognises this in 2 Corinthians 3" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 3: , by the fact of protesting against being required to bring such a letter when visiting Corinth, where he had “laid the foundation.” “Need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you or from you?” They were his letter, written on the heart, when he came to them; when he left them, they were his letter too, known and read of all men. We have the cases of Apollos in Acts 18 27," TARGET="_blank">Acts 18 27, and of Phoebe in Romans 16:1-2," TARGET="_blank">Romans 16:1-2, which will occur to all. This last case is helpful to our consideration, because the apostle’s was no mere formal commendation, but he adds her titles to special care from the saints—”Which is a servant (diakonos) of the church, which is at Cenchrea.” Letters then were not the stereotyped things they usually are to-day, mere forms filled up. Not that these are not better than nothing, nay often sufficient; but sometimes more would be better. Here Paul adds to “receive her as becometh saints,” “assist her, etc., for she hath been a succourer (prostatis) of many and of me also.” Ought not one, who has been regular at the meetings, diligent in service and helpful to the saints, get a better commendation than one who has been irregular in attendance, no special help, and even perhaps a trouble, on occasion?

If “fellowship” means sharing others’ privileges and responsibilities, how far can one who is hardly ever seen at the Gospel, Prayer, or Teaching Meetings consider oneself in full fellowship? As for the question whether no one can be received without a letter of commendation, as no rule is laid down, it is not for us to make one. It is rather strange that Paul, though he took letters from the high-priest to Damascus, did not think of getting one from thence to Jerusalem. It would have been easier for him had he done so, but Barnabas knew him and could answer for him, which did instead. But there can be no doubt as to the advisability of always carrying a letter when going to a strange place. Otherwise you can only be received on a principle which Scripture does not recognise—self-commendation. Really I should judge, no truly humble, godly person would wish to impose himself or herself on the saints and force fellowship, unless there were full confidence. A good letter imparts this. Where there is a godly walk, there will be godly consideration for fellow saints, and the more they are in touch with the Lord, the more they will share His mind in receiving those whom they believe to be His own and right with Him. “Receive ye one another, as Christ also received us, to the glory of God.” No one was ever so glad as He to receive, nor so careful as to whom and on what
conditions he did receive.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Under what conditions are we not to have fellowship with one "who is called a brother" (1 Corinthian

Under what conditions are we not to have fellowship with one "who is called a brother" (1 Corinthians 5:11)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:11)?

Paul gave instructions to the Corinthians not to keep company with those put away, even so much as social eating (verses 9, 11). He likewise instructed the Thessalonians to withdraw from those walking disorderly (2 Thessalonians 3:6)" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3:6) and not to keep company with them (verse 14). When therefore the assembly must deal with an individual whose behavior endangers the behavior of others (1 Corinthians 5:6-8;" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:6-8; 2 Thessalonians 3:11)" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3:11) or who needs to learn the seriousness of his sin (2 Thessalonians 3:14)," TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3:14), social contact must be limited. In all other cases, saints should cultivate social contact with each other (Hebrews 13:1-3)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 13:1-3).

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Does God treat people differently in different ages?

When God deals with different people in different times, do His dealings ever overlap?

"Unto the King of the ages,... be honor and glory unto the ages of eternity" (1 Timothy 1:17," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 1:17, Newberry), indicates that the Sovereign of the universe has designated distinct ages and He controls and dispenses all in all the ages. Such principles as repentance, faith, and submission to God abide in every dispensation. Likewise, the gospel of the grace of God in this age and the gospel of the kingdom in a coming age are both founded on atonement. How God works distinguishes these periods. Since the Church is a wholly new entity and not an extension of Israel, each has its own peculiar and distinct dealings from God. In the present age, God is forming the Church. When this masterpiece is complete, God will deal with the nation of Israel in a distinct way Although God's ways are always consistent with each dispensation, events in one age can foreshadow events in the succeeding age. We may be observing events today that foreshadow prophetic scriptures yet to be fulfilled. To borrow from another, "If it were not that we knew that the clock of prophecy cannot commence until the Church is raptured, we would have thought it had already commenced." "How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out" (Romans 11:33)" TARGET="_blank">Romans 11:33)!

A. Hull

Other pages in this section

About this site

Will the Church be present in the tribulation?

Will part of the Church, according to the AV reading, be present during the tribulation?

We are not at liberty to decide which reading we prefer based on its support for our interpretation of the Scriptures. That decision must rest on manuscript evidence.

The "Day of Christ" (Philippians 1:10; 2:16)" TARGET="_blank">Philippians 1:10; 2:16) is linked with the end of our testimony on earth and the assessment of our service at the judgment Seat. Following 2 Thessalonians 2:2," TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 2:2, Paul writes, "...that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed..." The earliest "that man of sin" could be revealed would be at the beginning of the 7 year period (Daniel 9:27)," TARGET="_blank">Daniel 9:27), generally referred to as "The Tribulation." This would appear to teach that the Rapture follows the beginning of the Tribulation, a teaching inconsistent with several other passages.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Under what conditions would laboring men who planted an assembly step in to guide that flock?

Under what conditions would laboring men who planted an assembly step in to guide that flock?

Two possibilities exist: intervention may be necessary to prevent the destruction of the testimony; intervention may weaken the assembly’s ability to trust God, learning from and of Him through its needs. If intervention increases the assembly’s dependence on the laboring man, this contravenes his God-given role, because he has hindered the development of maturity in the assembly. The rare cases when he judges that he must intervene will be emergencies. He will need spiritual wisdom to determine this, and the principle James states (James 1:5)" TARGET="_blank">James 1:5) indicates his recourse.

David Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

A Christian friend is "claiming her boys for Christ," even if the rapture occurs. Is this sound?

A Christian friend is "claiming her boys for Christ," even if the rapture occurs. Is this sound?

What Christian mother would not have a burden for her unbelieving sons, especially if they are young men? Saying anything to discourage this mother would be unkind. Pointing out a couple of problems in this sister’s thinking might help others, however.

The first is a matter that has appeared in these columns previously. Those who, during the tribulation, have "received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved" will be damned (2 Thessalonians 2:10," TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 2:10, 12a). They did not believe the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness (v 12). By the middle of the seven year period, these will have had sufficient truth that they could have been saved, but they chose not to believe that truth. The result is a judgement assigned by God that, although they are still living, they will be deceived and subsequently damned. They will see the fulfillment of God’s Word in "the abomination of desolation" (Matthew 24:15)" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 24:15) and their doom will be sealed.

If during this period God will so severely judge these who have had 42 months of privilege, what makes us think that He will treat those with greater privilege (and have seen His Word fulfilled in the Rapture) differently? Those who know the gospel clearly in this age will have had clearer light, personal testimony urging them to accept salvation, and closer dealings of the Spirit with their conscience. Knowing the enmity of the human heart (Rom 8:7)" TARGET="_blank">Rom 8:7) and the wilfulness of those who resist the gospel (John 3:36" TARGET="_blank">John 3:36b), we should expect that God will deal as severely with the privileged who enter that seven year period as He will with the less privileged 42 months later. In light of this, I judge it to be a cruel unkindness to give anyone who knows the gospel message any hope that he can be saved after the Rapture.

The second concern is equally sensitive. "Claiming our children for Christ" because we have prayed for them could be sound. This could be a statement of confidence in God, knowing that He is kind (Luke 6:35)," TARGET="_blank">Luke 6:35), shares our concerns (1 Peter 5:7)," TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 5:7), and loves to answer prayer (Psalm 65:2)." TARGET="_blank">Psalm 65:2). This is proper and grows out of a vibrant relationship with our Father. Such a statement of trust does not, however, obligate our Father to do what we have asked; it is a matter of trusting Him.

On the other hand, if the statement amounts to a bargain with God, it is seriously misguided. If something a believer does places God under obligation or makes his children more "savable," will that child be saved by grace or by his parents’ works?

Praying fervently (James 5:16)" TARGET="_blank">James 5:16) and urgently for his children’s salvation is becoming for a Christian parent. Anything less would seem uninformed. At the same time, humble confidence in God is always sound.

David Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu