What does Matthew 10:8 really mean? It is often misused by those individuals suggesting that no minister of the gospel should ever receive compensation (remuneration) for their services rendered as a minister. But of course that idea/view runs contrary to scriptural teachings. For example, Yahushua received funds (donations) from others that desired to support his ministry; his ministry included the support of himself, the twelve and intermittently more than "seventy" other disciples; his ministry was also a truly compassionate vehicle by which to help the poor via alms (charity) giving.
Luke 8:3 says this, "And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod's steward, and many others, which ministered unto him of their substance."
The word substance above (in the Greek) means: things extant or in hand, that is, property or possessions: - goods, that which one has, things which (one) possesseth, substance, that hast.
Ask yourself the following questions, Why did Judas carry a "bag" (John 13:29) if Yahushua and the disciples received no donations for their ministry? Why was it understood by the disciples that Judas was to "buy" things from the "bag's" contents if there was no money in the "bag"? Why was it understood by the disciples that Judas gave "alms" to the poor if there was no money in the "bag" to give? How could Judas be a thief if there was no money in the "bag" to steal? The single obvious answer to all the aforementioned questions is that there WAS money in the "bag" and the money came from donations that were received from people outside of his ministerial group, as indicated in Luke 8:3 above. Judas was assigned the task of being the "treasurer" (holder of the bag); the purchaser and alms distributor for Yahushua's ministry. Of course, Judas was a thief, but he obviously did not steal all the funds. That would be too obvious and, after all, purchases and donations were being made from the "bag".
The important lesson, however, is found in both the Old & New Testament, as expounded on by Apostle Paul. Apostle Paul said, "do not muzzle the ox" (Deuteronomy 25:4; 1 Corinthians 9:9; 1 Timothy 5:18) but conversely he also instructed that one should not do ministry for "filthy lucre" (1 Timothy 3:3). In other words, even though a minister of the gospel is entitled to be remunerated ("a man his worthy of his hire" - Luke 10:7), it does not give him/her license to seek wealth or do it just for money. When an ox eats for his work, he does not get rich. Likewise, the purpose of the ministry is not for men to build kingdoms for themselves and get rich from it, but they are to live in humble modesty, as did Yahushua and his band of disciples, and give an equitable amount to the widows, orphans, stranger (the poor) out of monies collected. This "do not muzzle the ox" principle works in concert with, and does not contradict, the "living off the gospel" (1 Corinthians 9:14) principle, also mentioned by Apostle Paul. The "living off the gospel" principle, although similar to the OT priestly model, is significantly different than and supports an entirely different kind of covenant and ministry. But each model validates that an eternal principle of "giving" exists. Giving began before humans were created, it continues to exist now and will continue on into eternity.
Furthermore, the OT priesthood paradigm illustrates the economic level at which each priest should rank. It was to be equal to that of the poorest Israelite. When each priest was consecrated, they were to bring an offering equal to that of those who were only able to bring the smallest allowable offering, i.e., a turtle dove, or the smallest allowable amount of grain in lieu of an expensive animal. Further indication of this economic condition is the fact that Levites were not allowed to own inheritable property. Their portion was directly tied to ministry and their lot was to sit and eat with and among the poor, the widow, the orphan and the stranger. This fact is clearly illustrated and substantiated by the Law of the Third-Year Tithe. Sadly, most clerics today, who mistakenly still teach tithing as a New Covenant regulation, condemn themselves in that they "rob" YHVH, i.e., they misuse and misappropriate the Third-Year Tithes; they do not follow the actual Biblical model/teachings on tithing; in this act alone clerics gravely sin. It was for this same sin (50% of Israel's sin according to Amos) that YHVH promised to (and did) judge Israel. Also keep in mind that Amos was a contemporary of Isaiah, et al.
For more information on scriptural teachings regarding tithes and offerings, download a free copy of Disciples of Christ Volume Five or go to our tithing page.
|