JCnot4me.com
“Am I therefore become your enemy for telling you the truth?”
The Apostle Paul Galatians 4:16
Cease the Fleecing of the Flock!
Mark Smith 1973, 1999
********
Proposition
The New Testament teaches that only Apostles
had the right to be paid by the church
for their preaching.
Introduction
If you are like most people, you have always felt a bit queasy about the way money & religion has been mixed together. When your preacher gets up and begs for money like some (well-
You probably also felt queasy when you learned how much some of these preachers and religions were taking in. To really put the following paragraphs in perspective, keep in mind that the very first Christian preacher, the Apostle Peter, was broke-
The PTL Club: Reverend Jim Bakker, and his clown-
Jim & Tammy lived it up for many years-
The Worldwide Church of God: In 1979 the leadership of the Worldwide Church of God was actually sued by the state of California for pilfering church funds, selling off assets for personal gain, and "living extravagantly". More than $80 million in assets were at stake. The church’s weekly take from donations alone? (Use your best Dr. Evil impression): One million dollars. Total revenue amounted to nearly $70 million per year. (#18)
Churches in General: Churches now own about 25% of all the real estate in America. In Los Angeles county alone, the churches own $1.3 billion dollars worth of real estate. And according to the IRS, the donations made to churches average $19 billion dollars a year. (#20)
If in spite of all the above, you gave money to a church anyway last Sunday to help support a clergyman, because you were told the Bible says to, you were swindled, per the dictionary definition:
Swindle: 1. To cheat or defraud of money or property..obtain by fraudulent means. (#11)
And if you believe the Bible, then you also believe that no one who swindles-
…nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revelers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God. (#3: NASB)
Those people that took your money are swindlers. They have twisted the Bible to suck money out of you. You have probably been swindled like this week after week, going on many years by now. Those uneasy feelings you’ve always felt regarding "the offering" are correct. Yes, you are the victim of a fraud.
Fraud: Intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value. (#15)
This weekly rip-
"Such teachers are not working for our Lord Jesus, but only want gain (i.e. money) for themselves. They are good speakers, and simple-
This study will build a case, verse by verse, brick by brick, which will show that your beloved clergyman is just another form of con artist-
I intend to show that the New Testament teaches only Apostles were authorized to get paid for preaching and teaching. There are no Apostles alive today, and therefore no one today should be getting paid to preach. The whole subject of Apostles, however, is another booklet, available from the author. If I manage to convince you within this booklet that only Apostles had the right to be professional preachers, then your next step is to research Apostles. Ask for my booklet "Authority in Church Government." Here, it is enough to show you that only Apostles had the right to be paid by the church for their preaching.
The Study
Acts 20:29-
I know that after my departure savage (burdensome-
Commentary
As seen from context, Paul is contrasting himself against the "burdensome wolves" to come to the Ephesian church in the future. These "burdensome wolves" would burden the Ephesian church by being supported by the church. If my theory is true that the early church only supported those it thought to be Apostles, then those that would seek to burden the church would first have to pass themselves off as Apostles. In other words, if my theory is true, then the Ephesian church would eventually have men who would falsely claim to be Apostles. Is this in fact how it turned out? Did the Ephesian church eventually have men who tried to pass themselves off as Apostles? Indeed they did, thus confirming my theory 100%. Listen to what the Apostle John wrote to the Ephesian church years later, while he was on the Island of Patmos:
I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance, and that you cannot endure evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves Apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false. (#3: NASB, Rv 2:2)
Thus history has confirmed what my theory predicted. My theory predicted false Apostles, and sure enough, false Apostles appeared in the Ephesian church. In science, it is extremely strong evidence when a theory is able to correctly predict how events will turn out.
False Apostles are easily able to be detected-
The signs of a true Apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles. (#3: NASB, 2C 12:12)
These men coming to Ephesus were going to burden the church. From the context, and the meaning of that word in the Greek, it becomes clear that the burden was a burden of being supported by the church. These "wolves" would let others support them, instead of supporting themselves, thus "burdensome wolves". Paul on the other hand, left the example of being self-
Most translations, done as they are by professional clergymen, do not translate "bareis" in this verse as burdensome. They try to hide its meaning behind such words as savage, oppressive, grievous, vicious, or ferocious. But how well does their reasoning hold up? "Bareis" is also used in 1Tm 5:16. Let’s see how it looks through their spectacles—
"If any woman who is a believer has dependent widows, let her assist them, and let not the church be burdened (savage? oppressive? grievous? vicious? ferocious?)…."
It is easy to see that for the clergy the end (keeping their clergy jobs) justifies the means (mistranslating the Greek). When the situation means losing their jobs, these "burdensome wolves" adjust their ethics to fit the situation-
Matthew 7: 15,16
Be on your guard against false religious teachers, who come to you dressed up as sheep but are really greedy wolves. (#25: Phillips)
Commentary
We just got done reading about "burdensome wolves", and now we run into "greedy wolves". I see a common theme here! Jesus and Paul both warn against a professional clergy. The Greek word, here translated "greedy", is "harpax," which means a robber, an extortioner.
Extortion: "To obtain from a person by force or undue or illegal power or ingenuity." (#15: Webster’s)
Note that Jesus compared these false teachers-
1 Thessalonians 2:1-
1 You know, brothers, that our visit to you was not a failure.
2 We had previously suffered and been insulted in Philippi, as you know, but with the help of our God we dared to tell you his gospel in spite of strong opposition.
3 For the appeal we make does not spring from error or impure motives, nor are we trying to trick you.
4 On the contrary, we speak as men approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel. We are not trying to please men but God, who tests our hearts.
5 You know we never used flattery, nor did we put on a mask to cover up greed— God is our witness.
6 We were not looking for praise from men, not from you or anyone else. As Apostles of Christ we could have been a burden to you,
7 but we were gentle among you, like a mother caring for her little children.
8 We loved you so much that we were delighted to share with you not only the gospel of God but our lives as well, because you had become so dear to us.
9 Surely you remember, brothers, our toil and hardship; we worked night and day in order not to be a burden to anyone while we preached the gospel of God to you.
10 You are witnesses, and so is God, of how holy, righteous and blameless we were among you who believed.
11 For you know that we dealt with each of you as a father deals with his own children,
12 encouraging, comforting and urging you to live lives worthy of God, who calls you into his kingdom and glory. (#16: NIV)
Other Translations…
(#4: CLNT) For neither did we at any time become flattering in expression, according as you are aware; neither with a pretense for GREED, God is witness; neither seeking glory from men, neither you, nor from others, when WE COULD BE A BURDEN AS CHRIST’S APOSTLES.
(#7: NWT) Neither have we been seeking glory from men, no, either from you or from others, though WE COULD BE AN EXPENSIVE BURDEN AS APOSTLES OF CHRIST.
(#8: KJV) ...when we might have been BURDENSOME, as the APOSTLES of Christ.
(#14: TCNT) ...although, as APOSTLES of Christ, we might have BURDENED you with our SUPPORT.
COMMENTARY
Paul comes flat out and says that a paid preacher is a burden, not a help, to a church. This, of course, runs contrary to what you’ve been told all your life by paid preachers. They tell you the exact opposite-
"The pastor is not a necessity. He is a fungus growth upon the church, the body of Christians, dwarfing its growth... and until the church gets rid of him it will never prosper." (#26)
Paul has written enough to put every clergyman on this planet to shame-
In verse nine, Paul points out that in addition to working DAYS, he also worked NIGHTS. And he is talking about REAL work-
Paul also mentions that he wasn’t hiding greed behind a false front. His motivation was not to suck money out of these people, even though "AS APOSTLES" they had every right. "As Apostles", and not as anything else. Evangelists did not have this right, preachers did not have this right, pastors did not have this right, and you the reader do not have this right. This right to be supported by the church for preaching the gospel was reserved only for the Apostles.
It should also be noticed that Paul does not equate working with preaching the gospel. The two activities are clearly separate in Paul’s mind. This pulls the rug out from under those who say their preacher works when he preaches the gospel, and is therefore entitled to be paid for his working.
The word translated "burden" in verse six comes from the Greek word "Bareis". All too often in Bible translations, you will see this word butchered-
The Greek Word “Bareis” in
1st Thess. Chapter 2
Bible Version Translation of Exact Same Word
Verse 6 Verse 9
Smith & Goodspeed Stood on our Dignity Burden
Green���s Literal Translation Weight of Glory Burden
New American Standard Bible Asserted our Authority Burden
New Revised Standard Version Made Demands Burden
Weymouth’s Stood on our Dignity Burden
Amplified New Testament Asserted our Authority Burden
Emphasized New Testament Assumed Dignity Burden
The New Berkeley Version Claim Authority Burden
The Living Bible Honor Burden
The New English Bible Made Our Weight Felt Burden
You have to admit-
Religionists protecting their sacred cash-
Jude 16
These men are grumblers, dissatisfied with life. They go where their passions lead, their talk is arrogant and they cultivate people in the hope of gain. (#13: S&G)
Acts 8:20
But Peter said to him, ‘May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money!’ (#3: NASB)
Other Translations…
(#6: The Living Bible) ...thinking God’s gift can be bought!
Commentary
Christians believe that the gospel is Biblegod’s free gift to the world. Imagine how upset a god would be to find preachers have turned around and sold the gift so freely given them-
Of course, there are some naïve readers that are thinking to themselves "Oh no! Our minister isn’t in it for the money! He just looooves the Lord!" Let them try this experiment: stop paying the preacher. See how long he sticks around being unpaid like the Apostle Paul. See how much he "looooooves the Lord" when he isn’t getting paid to "love the lord. Tell him he can still preach, but in addition to his preaching he’ll have to get a real job like the Apostle Paul did. I guarantee you, 99.999% of all preachers will be out of there, scrambling for a new pulpit to fill. "Looooves the Lord" my ass! It’s that damn paycheck that he’s loyal to, and if your church won't pay him, he’ll whore himself to some other church that will!
Micah 3:11
"...her priests instruct for a price..."
Her leaders pronounce judgment for a bribe, her priests instruct for a price, and her prophets divine for money. Yet they lean on the Lord saying, ‘Is not the Lord in our midst? Calamity will not come upon us.’ (#3: NASB)
Commentary
Anyone who is so gullible or naive as to think that their preacher doesn't have a price tag stuck on his ass, or is not in it "for the money" is invited to try this test: stop paying him, and see how long he sticks around "just because he loves the Lord". I can guarantee you, the VAST majority of whores (religious or secular) both abide by this rule:
No Pay, No Play
1 Timothy 6:5-
And constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, WHO SUPPOSE THAT GODLINESS (i.e. religion) IS A MEANS OF GAIN. But godliness actually is a means of great gain, when accompanied by contentment. For we have brought nothing into the world, so we cannot take anything out of it either. And if we have food and covering, with these we shall be content. But those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a snare and many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge men into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith, and pierced themselves with many a pang. (#3: NASB)
Other Translations…
(#6: The Living Bible) These arguers—their minds warped by sin—don’t know how to tell the truth; to them the Good News is just a means of making money. Keep away from them.
(#9:Amp) …men who are corrupted in mind and bereft of the truth, who imagine that godliness or righteousness is a source of profit—a money-
Commentary
In the clearest of terms, the Apostle Paul condemns those who have turned preaching into a full-
Why haven’t you heard this before? Why hasn’t this doctrine of Paul been shouted from the rooftops, and echoed from pulpits across this land? Why have the clergy consistently avoided preaching on verses like these? To even ask such questions is to answer such questions. The reason the clergy have engaged in such a massive conspiracy of silence on this issue is because they themselves are the target of Paul’s wrath. They are the ones guilty of having turned preaching into a full-
The clergy of your city have turned religion into a "means of livelihood". A clergyman is a professional religionist-
The original Greek word here translated "contentment," in the primary meaning means
A perfect condition of life, in which NO AID or SUPPORT is needed. (#1: Thayer’s)
In other words, if someone in our era really wants to preach the gospel, he has to be able to support himself with a real job, so that no outside "aid or support is needed." He should not be sponging off of the church. The same Greek word is also used in 2C 9:8, where Paul says we all should be taking care of ourselves, and not mooching off of others (such as clergymen do):
And God is able to make all grace, every favor and earthly blessing, come to you in abundance, so that you may always and under all circumstances and whatever the need, be SELF-
2 Corinthians 2:17
For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God. (#3: NASB)
(#10: RSV) For we are not, like so many, PEDDLERS of God’s word...
(#6: The Living Bible) ...we are not like those hucksters—and there are many of them—whose idea in getting out the Gospel is to MAKE A LIVING OUT OF IT.
(#4: CLNT) For we are not as the M A J 0 R I T Y ...
ANY preacher, regardless of how popular he is, how handsome he is, how well he tickles the ears of his groupies, and regardless of how good an orator he is-
The word "peddling" that was used in this verse by Paul to describe the professional clergy of his age is a very pregnant word, full of meaning. Thayer defines the word thusly-
"A petty retailer, a huckster, peddler, to make money by selling anything; to get sordid gain by dealing in anything, to do a thing for base gain." (#1: Thayer’s)
I can’t think of a better word to describe most modern televangelists! What is really interesting is that this word, in the Greek, has it’s root in the practice of some of the wine dealers of Paul’s day. Their practice, in order to sell more, would be to dilute their wine with water. Paul chose an appropriate description of gospel peddlers. In order to please more hearers and thus sell more gospel, they dilute the message. Paul knew the time would come when the people would not listen to real gospel preaching, but wanting their ears tickled, they would hire their own teachers, putting them on the payroll-
Notice also Paul describes his group as being "from God." The very word Apostle, if you’ll recall, means exactly that: "one sent." Apostles, having been sent by Biblegod, were the only ones authorized by Biblegod to accept support. Non-
And He said to them, ‘It is written, "‘My house shall be called a house of prayer;’" but you are making it a robbers’ den! (#3: NASB)
For there are many (Note: MANY) rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach, for the sake of SORDID GAIN. One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.’ (#3: NASB)
This word that Paul used-
"Sordid: dirty, filthy, marked by baseness." (#15: Webster’s)
It should be noted that it was the "gain" these men were making, that is, the profit, the fact that they were profiting off the death of Jesus, and not the money itself, nor the teaching, which was sordid. Their teaching was of course "something that should not be taught," but the money was just common everyday money. It is the profiting off the death of Christ that is being objected to. Even if they were teaching things that were 100% true, they would still be in the wrong for "doing a Judas", i.e. making a profit off the Christian prophet.
Notice that Paul also calls these men "lazy gluttons". The fact that they were "lazy gluttons" has alot to do with the profession they picked. Ministers, contrary to their constant public protestations, are in reality some of the laziest people around. It is certainly the dream-
Another occupational trait Paul brings up is the fact that professional clergymen are full of hot air. They can just go on and on spinning a yarn. It does seem to make sense that an empty talker and a deceiver could really profit in this profession.
Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our lord Jesus Christ, that you keep aloof from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example; because we did not act in an undisciplined manner among you, nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with labor and hardship we kept working night and day so that we might not be a
.
to any of you; not because we do not have the right to this, but in order to offer ourselves as a MODEL for you, that you might
For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: If anyone (Note: includes preachers too!) will not work, neither let him eat. For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but are acting like busybodies. Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to WORK in quiet fashion and eat their OWN bread. But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary of doing good. And if anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of that man and do not associate with him, so that he may be put to shame. And yet do not regard him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. (#3: NASB)
The key word here is "burden". The Apostle Paul, whose every burp & fart on paper is, to the Fundy Christian, directly inspired by Biblegod, has here clearly labeled the professional clergy not a benefit, but rather a burden; not a help, but rather a hinderance. Picture tying 50 lb weights to your legs before a race-
Once again, Paul manages to hit the nail right on the head. As already seen, Paul pegged the professional clergy as being lazy and full of hot air. In this section, he condemns their acting like "busybodies". They make it their job to busy themselves sticking their noses into the business of others. They oft times end up acting like self-
To bustle about uselessly, to busy one’s self about trifling, needless, useless matters. Used apparently of a person OFFICIOUSLY inquisitive about others’ affairs. (#1: Thayer’s)
Paul busted his ass working not just one, but TWO jobs, while on top of that continuing to preach, never once complaining or taking even a nickel from them for preaching. In light of this, I tend to laugh at lazy preachers publicly complaining they don’t have enough time or money. Let them try to get some sympathy from Paul! Paul suffered all these troubles for just one purpose and one purpose only: to leave an example to be followed. He even clearly labels it: "as a model for you, that you might follow our example." Paul goes out of his way to make it clear that there are NO exceptions to this rule, that it applies to "anyone" which certainly means clergy as well. But what do modern clergy do today in response to that? Not a damn thing. They totally ignore applying Paul’s example to themselves. They have a vested interest in NOT applying it to themselves. As the author Upton Sinclair said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." So they will look at clear passages like this, and pretend to not understand how it could possible apply to little ol’ them. They make themselves completely blind to this whole section of the New Testament, as if it doesn’t exist. I have actually witnessed this from a pew, listening to a clergyman dance around this section, careful to avoid any areas that might nail his ass to the wall. Such verbal tap dancing seems to be a skill of both the clergy and politicians. The clergy loudly point to Paul’s right to be supported, while ignoring Paul’s example of not being supported. They play "smorgasbord restaurant" with the Bible, grabbing what they like, ignoring what they don’t like.
Of course, clergymen are going to say that none of this applies to them. That’s a given. They are special. It applies to you-
And to make it your ambition to lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands, just as we commanded you; so that you may behave properly toward outsiders and not be in any need. (#3: NASB)
(#8: KJV) ...and that ye may have lack of nothing.
(#10: RSV) ...and be dependent on nobody.
And let our own people really learn to apply themselves to good deeds—to honest labor and honorable employment—so that they may be able to meet necessary demands whenever the occasion may require and not be living idle and uncultivated and unfruitful lives. (#9: Amp)
Has the "ministry" earned a reputation for honest labor, lack of idleness? On the contrary. Literature for the past thousand years or more has recognized the slothfulness, the laziness, of full-
And we toil, working with our own hands. (#3: NASB)
He (Paul) lived there (in Rome) two whole years at his own expense and welcomed all who came to him, proclaiming the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance. (#21: NRSV)
Paul refused to accept a salary from the church at Rome, and instead, paid his own bills with his own earned money. Paul did not mind being helped on his way by the Romans, (Rm 15:24) but he, unlike the clergy, would not impose upon their hospitality to the extent that he would let them support him like he was some kind of deadbeat. Paul, even though he had the right as an Apostle to be paid for his preaching, usually declined. He knew it would set a bad example. How seldom, if at all, does one hear of any clergyman in our era working a real job to pay his own way, having turned down a salary from a church.
But Peter (to a beggar) said, ‘I do not possess silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you: In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene—walk! ‘ (#3: NASB)
Peter was the leader of the church in Jerusalem. By the time Peter was confronted by this beggar, his church had grown to over 3000 members (Acts 2:41). It would be very improbable for a modern day minister of such a large congregation to have no money, to be flat broke. Yet this is one of the things that separates the modern day professional clergy from their forefathers. A minister of such a prestigious church in our era would certainly have a pocket full of money. He would also probably have a new car, a gold watch, a pension plan, stock options, and a nice house in a nice gated neighborhood-
Peter was flat broke because he was not siphoning off church money into his own pockets. His church supported those that were truly in need (Acts 4:35, 6:1), and not those who put themselves in need by refusing to get a real job, such as clergymen. In our era, if money were being handed out at a church, clergyman would have already pushed themselves to the front of the line beforehand, with whatever’s remaining going to feed the hungry etc.
For a bishop, as God’s steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-
These twelve Jesus sent out (i.e. Apostlized them) after instructing them, saying, ‘Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans; but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as you go, preach, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons; freely you received, freely give. Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper (i.e. money) for your money belts; or a bag for your journey, or even two tunics, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support. (#3: NASB)
Jesus commanded them not to sell what they had gotten for free. "Freely you received, freely give." Yet in direct violation of this, the clergy have made a full-
Preachers who have been sent by Jesus (i.e. made into Apostles) are allowed support. It is their right. The Bible here says "These twelve Jesus SENT OUT ..." Jesus sent these men, thus making them Apostles. Your minister is NOT an Apostle, thus has no right to be supported. All of the real Apostles died out over 1,900 years ago.
The word translated "support" means, in the Greek, "food, nourishment.’’ (#1: Thayer’s) The same word in the Greek is used in Acts 2:46; 9:19; 14:17; 27:33,34,36,38. All it means is food. Not money, houses, medical care, late model cars and ad infinitum. You might get fat from such support, but you’d never get rich. In fact Peter, one who was sent by Jesus, said that he had no money at all (Acts 3:6). More than likely, the Apostles in the early church, when being supported by the church (i.e. food, and a place to sleep), received their food the same way the widows did:
Now at this time while the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint arose on the part of the Hellenistic Jews against the native Hebrews, because their widows were being overlooked in the daily serving of food. (At 6:1)
If anyone can prove he has been sent by Biblegod or Jesus, then you may support him. Let him humbly sit in with your widows in the daily serving of food. Give him a meal, and a corner he can sleep in.
After these things he (Paul) left Athens and went to Corinth. And he found a certain Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, having recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome. He came to them, because he was of the same trade, and he stayed with them and they were working; for by trade they were tentmakers. And he was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks. But when Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, solemnly testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ. (#3: NASB)
Paul at first did not make use of his apostolic right (1Th 2:6) to burden the church while at Corinth. Instead, he worked at his trade, which was tentmaking, and preached on the weekends. Paul continued this until his two friends arrived with support from Macedonia, to give Paul, at which time he quit working and then lived off the money from Macedonia. As Paul says elsewhere:
…and when I was present with you (Corinthians) and was in need, I was not a burden to anyone; for when the brethren came from Macedonia, they fully supplied my need, and in everything I kept myself from being a burden to you, and will continue to do so. (#3: NASB, 2C 11:9)
This is a good example of Paul’s right as an Apostle to get money for preaching. More light is shed on this in the next section, in which Paul proves to the same Corinthians that because he had this right, therefore he must have been a real Apostle.
1. Am I not free? Am I not an Apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?
2. If to others I am not an Apostle, at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my Apostleship in the Lord.
3. My defense to those who examine me is this:
Author's Note: Please notice all the words here I've marked in red. It is obvious that Paul is proving his right to support by proving not that he's a preacher, but rather that he's an Apostle.
4. Do we not have a right to eat and drink?
5. Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the Apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?
6. Or do only Barnabas and I not have a right to refrain from working?
7. Who at any time serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard, and does not eat the fruit of it? Or who tends a flock and does not use the milk of the flock?
8. I am not speaking these things according to human judgment, am I? Or does not the Law also say these things?
9. For it is written in the Law of Moses, "You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing." God is not concerned about oxen, is He?
10. Or is He speaking altogether for our sake? Yes, for our sake it was written, because the plowman ought to plow in hope, and the thresher to thresh in hope of sharing the crops.
11. If we sowed spiritual things in you, is it too much if we should reap material things from you?
12. If others share the right over you, do we not more? Nevertheless, we did not use this right, but we endure all things, that we may cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ.
13. Do you not know that those who perform sacred services eat the food of the temple, and those who attend regularly to the altar have their share with the altar?
14. So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.
15. But I have used none of these things. And I am not writing these things that it may be done so in my case; for it would be better for me to die than have any man make my boast an empty one.
16. For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I do not preach the gospel.
17. For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me.
18. What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may offer the gospel without charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. (#3: NASB)
"The LORD directed those that preach the gospel" of verse 14 should be the big hint here. The only ones "The Lord" has commissioned, directed, and sent out to preach the gospel are the Apostles-
Now for some background on this chapter. Paul, the Apostle, had a hard time convincing the church at Corinth that he was enough of an Apostle to be worthy of the right of Apostolic support, even though he had no intention of using said right. So why the concern with proving his right to Apostolic support? Because, if he could prove his right to support, he also proves at the same time his Apostleship: Support = Apostleship. Thus, Paul’s logic behind this whole chapter directly supports my basic thesis that: only Apostles had the right to be paid by the church for their preaching, and if you could prove your right to be supported for preaching, you also proved your Apostleship.
Some of the people at Corinth thought Paul was not accepting support because there was something "wrong" with Paul’s Apostleship. The very fact that this was the case totally supports my thesis. Paul defends himself by showing that he is just as qualified to these rights as the rest of the Apostles (thus proving his Apostleship), but has decided not to make use of said rights.
1-
3 Paul is defending his Apostleship. But how does he defend his Apostleship? He defends his Apostleship by proving his right to be supported. Now why would he do a crazy thing like that, unless my thesis is correct? He used that line of defense because only Apostles could lawfully burden the church in exchange for their preaching. Example: A man claims to be a tax-
4-
7 Who owns the army? Who owns the vineyard? Who owns the flock? In the Kingdom of Biblegod, Joe Hovah is the owner, and if you are going to be supported by Biblegod’s army, you’d better have authorization first from "the captain of salvation." And if you are going to be eating in the vineyard, you better have permission from "the lord of the vineyard." And if you will be feeding yourself from the flock, you better be a friend of "the great Shepherd of the sheep."
8-
11 Once again, remember, it was Apostles doing the planting.
12 The others, to whom he refers, are probably Apollos, Cephas, and "they." (lC 1:12; 15:11) The reason that Paul is more deserving is because "I labored even more than all of them." (lC 15:10) Paul thought that being a burden to the church would also be a burden to the good news. Paul thought that being "full time" was a hindrance, not a help, to "the power of God for salvation to every one who believes." Most clergymen in our era want you to believe that being full time is the best way-
13 Could just any Joe Blow be a priest in the temple? Of course not. Only Levites were allowed to become priests, and then only after meeting many requirements, and only then after being duly authorized. Going through the motions were not enough. A priest had to be approved of by Biblegod.
14 The Lord directed for the support of the preachers which he sent out. The tenth chapter of Matthew has the account. It must be remembered that Paul, in this ninth chapter of 1st Corinthians, is making a defense of his Apostleship, and not of his "preachership." This 14th verse must not be isolated and ripped out of context to change it’s meaning. For example, Acts 16:31 ("Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved…"), when isolated, refutes any tract on baptism. 1P 3:21, when isolated, refutes any tract on faith. In fact, even lC 9:14, when isolated, would mean that female preachers would also have to be supported, along with any one else who wanted to preach-
15-
At first glance, the 14th verse of this chapter seems to support the contention of the professional clergy that they deserve to get paid for doing whatever it is they claim they do all day. And, if you are one to rip a verse out of context, ignoring the rest of the chapter and Bible, they may have a point. However, for the rest of you, it should be clear now that we’ve completed a careful examination of this chapter. It should be clear that Paul taught, and the early church believed, that only Apostles were authorized to get paid for preaching. It is upon this belief the entire argument of Paul within this chapter rests. To claim as the clergy do, that the only requirement to get paid is to preach, is to make total nonsense out of this entire chapter. The only way this chapter makes any sense at all is if, as my proposition states:
"The New Testament teaches that
only Apostles had the right
to be paid by the church
for their preaching."
But even if I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not so in knowledge; in fact, in every way we have made this evident to you in all things. Or did I commit a sin in humbling myself that you might be exalted, because I preached the gospel of God to you without charge? I robbed other churches, taking wages from them to serve you; and when I was present with you and was in need, I was not a burden to anyone; for when the brethren came from Macedonia, they fully supplied my need, and in everything I kept myself from being a burden to you, and will continue to do so. As the truth of Christ is in me, this boasting of mine will not be stopped in the regions of Achaia. Why? Because I do not love you? God knows I do! But what I am doing, I will continue to do, that I may cut off opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the matter about which they are boasting. For such men are false Apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as Apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel (#1: Thayer’s: "messenger") of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants (KJV "ministers:) also disguise themselves as servants (KJV "ministers") of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their deeds. (#3: NASB)
Paul implies that it is mostly the "ministers of Satan" who are getting paid to preach the gospel. Paul also once again is having to explain his stay in Corinth-
The signs of a true Apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles. For in what respect were you treated as inferior to the rest of the churches, except that I myself did not become a burden to you? Forgive me this wrong! Here for this third time I am ready to come to you, and I will not be a burden to you; FOR I DO NOT SEEK WHAT IS YOURS, BUT YOU; for children are not responsible to save up for their parents, but parents for their children. And I will most gladly spend and be expended for your souls. If I love you the more, am I to be loved the less? But be that as it may, I did not burden you myself; nevertheless, crafty fellow that I am, I took you in by deceit. Certainly I have not taken advantage of you through any on those whom I have sent to you, have I? I urged Titus to go, and sent the brother with him. Titus did not take any advantage of you, did he? Did we not conduct ourselves in the same spirit and walk in the same steps? (#3: NASB)
Once again, Paul is having to explain his actions to the Corinthians. Once again, Paul himself combines the topics of Apostleship and being paid to preach. Why would he himself keep connecting the two, unless my thesis is correct? Paul also lays down a principle that destroys the modern clergy system. Paul says that he does not seek what is theirs (i.e. their money), but rather seeks them. He then backs it up with an analogy, showing that if anyone is to be paid, the people in charge of a congregation ought to be paying the congregation! Children, he says, are not the ones who are to "save up" for the parents. Let’s see the filthy rich televangelists try that shoe on for a change! Modern clergy fear to tread the path laid down by Paul. They say (with words) they will pay any price for Jesus, but with their deeds, they do the opposite. They claim they’d "die for Jesus", but in reality they won’t even get a job for Jesus! Lazy hypocrites!!!
And you yourselves know, Philippians, that at the first preaching of the gospel, after I departed from Macedonia, no church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving but you alone; for even in Thessalonica you sent a gift more that once for my needs. Not that I seek the gift itself, but I seek for the profit which increases to your account. But I have received everything in full, and have an abundance; I am amply supplied, having received from Epaphroditus what you have sent, a fragrant aroma, an acceptable sacrifice, well pleasing to Cod. (#3: NASB)
And Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, and Susanna, and many others who were contributing to their (Jesus-
If anyone is stealing he must stop it and begin using those hands of his for honest work so he can give to others in need. (#6: The Living Bible)
A thief is defined as someone who is taking something that he has no right to be taking. A clergyman has no right to be taking money for preaching. Therefore, clergymen are thieves.
Yet wicked men and swindlers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. (#4: CLNT)
A swindler is someone who takes our money by fraud or deceit (#15: Webster’s). Paul may have be talking about the false Apostles in the Ephesian church, since some think that Timothy was in Ephesus at the time.
Such teachers are not working for our Lord Jesus, but only want gain for themselves. They are good speakers, and simple-
Little has changed since then. Look at the televangelists who rake in the most money-
Let's run a check list to see how closely modern televangelists match up with those that the Apostle Paul condemned:
They are teachers working for themselves, not Jesus
They want gain for themselves
They are good speakers
They oft fool simple-
As suspected, a perfect fit. Modern televangelists match perfectly the description of those that Paul warned about.
If you are really eager to give, then it isn’t important how much you have to give. God wants you to give what you have, not what you haven’t. OF COURSE, I DON’T MEAN THAT THOSE WHO RECEIVE YOUR GIFTS SHOULD HAVE AN EASY TIME OF IT AT YOUR EXPENSE, but you should divide with them. Right now you have plenty and can help them; then at some other time they can share with you when you need it. In this way each will have as much as he needs. (#6: The Living Bible)
One thing you will seldom, if ever see, is the above being carried out. It will be a cold day in hell when the Bakker’s, the Swaggart’s, the TBN’s and whatever start to give back as much as they’ve suckered in. And as far as preachers having "an easy time of it at your expense", with the Bakker’s even the good preacher’s dog got an easy time. Viewers may have gone hungry, sending their food money to the PTL club, but god-
You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or ANYTHING (including his money) that belongs to your neighbor. (#3: NASB)
Does your minister covet, i.e. desire to have for his own, your money or your tithe? Does he try to make you believe that your love for Biblegod is measured in the dollars and cents you give to your “church” (i.e. him)? Paul, unlike the preachers of today, did not desire your money—Acts 20:33.
Woe upon them! For they follow the example of Cain who killed his brother; and like Balaam (an Old Testament paid preacher), they will do anything for money, and like Korah, they have disobeyed Biblegod in the hope of gain and will die under His curse. (#6 The Living Bible)
But there were false prophets, too, in those days, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will cleverly tell their lies about God, turning against even their Master who bought them; but theirs will be a swift and terrible end. Many will follow their evil teaching that there is nothing wrong with sexual sin. And because of them Christ and His way will be scoffed at. THESE TEACHERS IN THEIR GREED WILL TELL YOU ANYTHING (even lies about the Bible saying they should be paid?????) TO GET HOLD OF YOUR MONEY. But God condemned them long ago and their destruction is on the way. (#6: The Living Bible)
...having a heart trained (at the seminary???) in greed accursed children; forsaking the right way they have gone astray, having followed the way of Balaam, the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness. (#3: NASB)
(#6: The Living Bible) ...they train themselves to be greedy.
Come, beasts of the plain, beasts of the forest, come, eat your fill, for Israel’s watchmen are blind, all of them unaware. They are all dumb dogs who cannot bark, stretched on the ground, dreaming, lovers of sleep, GREEDY DOGS THAT CAN NEVER HAVE ENOUGH. They are shepherds who understand nothing, absent each of them on his own pursuits, each intent on his own gain wherever he can find it. (#12: NEB)
For all, high and low, are out for ill-
For you endure it if a man assumes control of your souls and makes slaves of you, or devours your substance, spends your money, and preys upon you, or deceives and takes advantage of you, or is arrogant and puts on airs, or strikes you in the face. (#9: Amp)
(#22: The Jerusalem Bible) …makes slaves of you, makes you feed him, imposes on you, orders you about and slaps you in the face.
The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and THE POOR HAVE THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THEM. (#8: KJV)
In a listing of miracles such as this, they will save the most impressive miracle for last. Did you notice, therefore, what was saved for last? It appears that the greatest miracle of all these miracles is that the poor will have the gospel preached to them! This even out-
Now the poor mentioned here-
Even in our era, someone preaching without getting paid is such a rarity as to count as a true miracle. Even the most pathetic of churches seem to always burden themselves with a full-
The hard-
Paul is not speaking of "paying the minister" but of eternal life. Once again, notice the context leading up to verse 6: Verse 4-
If any woman who is a believer has dependent widows, let her assist them, and let not the church be burdened, so that it may assist those who are widows indeed. Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing,’ and, ‘The laborer is worthy of his wages.’ (#3: NASB)
You will notice that the main emphasis of Paul here is to not burden the church down with unnecessary financial obligations. With such an emphasis, it is surprising that some clergymen point to this verse as a "proof text" to justify themselves bumming off the church. I guess this shows their desperation and blindness-
Some Greek lexicons define honor, in this passage alone, as meaning money. The hired clergymen who wrote the lexicons, as we all know, have a vested interest in preserving their jobs. But there is no excuse for their inconsistent translation of the word honor in other passages. If honor really means money, as they claim, let’s be consistent and "translate" it as such in the other passages where it’s used, to show these men that honor means honor, and not money. You will see, (unless you’re a hired gun for Religion, Inc.), that these verses, using their logic, make no sense at all. Likewise, neither does rendering honor into money, in 1Tm 5:17.
Rm 2:10 "honor money, and peace, to every man..."
Rm 13:7 "...fear to whom fear; honor money to whom honor money..."
Mk 7:6 "This people honors monies me with their lips..."
Hb 13:4 "Marriage is honorable moneyable in all, and the bed undefiled..."
The Bible claims that church elders should, when deserving, be honored twice as much. But certain hired guns (i.e. theologians) say that honor means honor in all passages except 1Tm 5:17, where the word magically turns into money, which ends up in their pockets. Which do you believe? And, in reality, what do the clergymen really believe about this verse? If they really believed that church elders should be getting paid, then church elders would be getting paid. Do they get paid? No, they don’t. Therefore, by their actions, by their refusing to pay the church elders, even clergymen agree with me on this verse. Their actions speak louder than their words-
For they went out for the sake of the Name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. Therefore we ought to support such men (i.e. receive as guests), that we may be fellow-
The Greek word for support means "to receive hospitably, welcome." (#1: Thayer’s) As you can see, the word "support" as used by the NASB, is deceiving. John commends Gaius, to whom this letter was written, for his hospitality. Others verses on hospitality are Rm 16:23; Hb 13:2; G1 6:10; 1Tm 5:10. As shown elsewhere in this paper, hospitality does not mean making a habit of supporting someone. (2Th 3:10)
For each one shall bear his own load (i.e. don’t let anyone-
The word twisters, who get such a kick twisting the word "honor" in 1Tm 5:17, also enjoy twisting this verse about. Here they claim the word share means to pay a salary, a fixed compensation paid regularly for services rendered. How about that?
I shall now attempt to show the obvious, that the word share means, of all things, share! Please answer these questions:
Does "share all good things" mean signing somebody's paycheck every week?
Does "share all good things" mean sharing your good things with the teacher in a give and take situation, lending and borrowing, or legally paying him outright for services rendered?
If "share all good things with him who teaches" means paying the one teaching a salary, and Sunday School teachers teach, then why aren't Sunday School teachers paid a salary?
If "share all good things" means a weekly paycheck, would you hire in for a job where the boss made no promise to pay, just to "share his good things" with you???
Does "sharing all good things" with your son or daughter consist of cutting them a paycheck?
********
Love your Maker with all your might, and do not leave his ministers without support. Fear the Lord and honor the priest and give him his dues, as you have been commanded, the firstfruits, the guilt-
True, this does say to honor the priest and not leave him without support. It also says to give him the fair portion of your animal sacrifices. What? You don’t do animal sacrifices? Well, if you were a Jew living before Christ’s time, you might. That is when this was written, and who it was written for.
But give to all, for God will have us give to all, of all his own gifts. They therefore that receive shall give an account to God, both wherefore they received, and for what end. And they that receive without a real need shall give an account for it; but he that gives shall be innocent. (#23: The Lost Books… Hermas 2:7,8)
Would hunger caused by a self-
Anxiety on this very point meets us in Didache 11:6. The Apostle (Note: Apostle, not preacher) traveling abroad is to receive only bread when leaving a place, and only enough to enable him to reach his next Christian night’s lodging: ‘But if he ask for money, he is a false prophet.’ ��The Didache, in this connection, takes such a completely different point of view that it considers a longer stay for the Apostle in a given community to be especially improper: he must stay no longer than one or two days at the most-
The one sure-
Notice also how stingy the churches are to be with those they do support-
Yet another thing to point out, is that it is Apostles which are under consideration for being supported. Not preachers, not teachers, not clergymen. Apostles-
Agbarus, therefore, commanded his subjects to be called early in the morning, and to hear the annunciation of Thaddeus; and after this, he commanded gold and silver to be given him; but he would not receive it, saying, If we have left our own, how shall we take what belongs to others? These things were done in the three hundred and fortieth year. (#2: Eusebius, p. 47)
The very thought of a modern clergyman turning down a kingly offer of solid gold is impossible to imagine. The clergymen that suck social security checks away from destitute lonely old people-
And why should we say more? It is impossible to tell the number of the gifts which the church throughout the world received from God, and the deeds performed in the name of Jesus Christ, that was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and this too every day for the benefit of the brethren, without deceiving any, or extracting their money. For as she has received freely from God she also freely ministers. (#2: Eusebius, page 187)
What ever happened to this principle? Did the vaunted "absolute" moral code the Christians claim to follow turn out to be mere situational ethics? This moral code that Jesus himself first laid down: "freely receive, freely give"} does it or does it not apply nowadays? If not, why not? Who changed it, and when and why? Why do 99.999% of all clergymen in our era violate an ethic that cost the early church so much to uphold? Have they no shame?
‘But who’ says he, ‘is this new teacher? His (i.e. Montanus’) works and his doctrines sufficiently show it. This is he that taught the dissolution of marriage, he that imposed laws of fasting, that called Pepuza and Tymium, little places in Phrygia, a Jerusalem, in order to collect men from every quarter thither; who established exactors of money, and under the name of offerings devised the artifice to procure presents; who
salaries
for those that preached his doctrine that it might grow strong by gormandizing and gluttony.’ Thus far concerning Montanus; and further on he writes concerning his prophetesses: ‘We show, therefore,’ says he, ‘that these same leading prophetesses, as soon as they were filled with the spirit, abandoned their husbands. How then can they utter this falsehood, who call Prisca a virgin?’ He afterwards proceeds again: ‘Does it not appear to you that the Scripture forbids any prophet to receive gifts and money? When therefore I see a prophetess receiving both gold and silver and precious garments, how can I fail to reject her?’ (#2: Eusebius, pp. 200, 201)
How can I fail to reject anyone (including MY OWN PREACHER-
In another part of the same work, he adds the following, respecting their boasted prophets: ‘If,’ says he, ‘they deny that their prophets took presents (i.e. money and things), let them at least acknowledge that if they should be proved to have received them, they are no prophets.’ (#2: Eusebius, p. 202)
Both of these were disciples of Theodotus the currier, the first that had been excommunicated by Victor, then bishop, as before said, on account of this opinion or rather insanity. Natalius was persuaded by them to be created a bishop of this heresy, with a salary from them of one hundred and fifty denarii a month. Being connected, therefore, with them, he was frequently brought to reflection by the Lord in his dreams. For the merciful God and our Lord Jesus Christ, would not that he who had been a witness of his own sufferings, should perish, though he was out of the church. But as he paid but little attention to these visions, being ensnared both by the desire of presiding among them, and that foul gain which destroys so many, he was finally lashed by holy angels, through the whole night, and was thus most severely punished; so that he… repented. (#2: Eusebius, p. 214)
(He) has now arrived at excessive wealth, by his iniquities and sacrileges, and by those various means which he employed to exact and extort from the brethren, depressing the injured and promising to aid them for a reward; and yet how he deceived them, and without doing them any good, took advantage of the rediness of those who were in difficulties, to make them give any thing in order to be freed from their oppressors. We shall say nothing of his making merchandise of piety; nor how he affected lofty things… (#2: Eusebius, p. 305)
********
Constantine Augustus to Caecilianus bishop of Carthage: As we have determined, that in all the provinces of Africa, Numidia, and Mauritania, something should be granted to certain ministers of the legitimate and most holy catholic religion, to defray their expenses, I have given letters to Ursus, the most illustrious Lieutenant-
We have now moved up in history closer to our era; to the era of the founding of the Catholic Church. By now the apostasy is in full swing, and we have the clear beginnings of the professional, full-
********
Peter
Andrew, brother of Peter
James, son of Zebedee
John, brother of James
Philip
Bartholomew
Thomas
Matthew
James, son of Alphaeus
Thaddaeus
Simon
Judas Iscariot
(Mt 10:2-
Matthias
(Acts 1:26)
Paul
Barnabas
(Acts 14:14; 13:2-
Timothy
Silas
(1Th 2:6— trace the plurals, such as "we," "us," "our," from 2:6, where it says "Apostles," back to where it tells who these plurals refer to-
Antipas
(Rv 2:13— the term "witness" is used in speaking of Apostles. Lk 24:48; Jn 15:27; At 1:8; At 4:33; At 10:39-
Unknown
(Rv 11:3— the term "witness" is used in speaking of Apostles.)
Unknown
(Rv 11:3— the term "witness" is used in speaking of Apostles.)
Andronicas, a relative of Paul
Junias, a relative of Paul
(Rm 16:7)
Apollos
(lC 4:9— the term, "us Apostles," trace the plurals back to who the "us Apostles" refers to-
Philip
("...was the first of the Gentiles that received of the mysteries of the divine word from Philip. The Apostle, led by a vision, thus instructed him,...") (#2: Eusebius, p. 50)
********
1) Thayer’s Greek-
2) Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius Pamphilus (~324 AD), Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI, 1971
3) New American Standard Bible, The Lockman Foundation, La Habra CA, 1963
4) Concordant Literal New Testament, Concordant Publishing Concern, Canyon Country, CA 1976
5) Today’s English Version, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN 1976
6) The Living Bible, Tyndale House Publishers, Wheaton, Il, 1971
7) The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, Watch Tower…, Brooklyn, NY 1984
8) King James Version, Church of England, 1611
9) The Amplified New Testament, Lockman Foundation, La Habra CA, 1958
10) Revised Standard Version, Thomas Nelson Inc., NY 1971
11) The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition, Houghton Mifflin Co, 1992
12) The New English Bible, Oxford University Press, 1970
13) The Complete Bible: An American Translation, J.M. Powis Smith & Edgar J. Goodspeed, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1963
14) The Twentieth Century New Testament, Fleming Revell Co., NY 1904
15) Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, G. & C. Merriam Co, Springfield, Mass, 1965
16) The New Internationl Version, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI, 1976
17) The Albuquerque Tribune, Saturday, April 18, 1987
18) The Sarasota Herald Tribune, Feb. 24, 1979
19) The Orange County Register, March 29, 1987, page A-
20) The Book Your Church Doesn’t Want You To Read, Tim Leedom, Kendall/Hunt Pub, Debuque, Iowa 1993, page 341
21) New Revised Standard Version, National Council of Churches, Oxford Univ. Press, NY 1989
22) The Jerusalem Bible
23) The Lost Books of the Bible, World Publishing Co, New York, 1971
24) Earliest Christianity, Johannes Weiss
25) The New Testament in Modern English, J.B. Phillips, Macmillan Company, New York, 1966
26) Gospel Advocate, May 20 1885
********
Links to Off-
http://www.piney.com/RMPreacPay.html
http://www.piney.com/PreachersSoldiers.html
http://www.piney.com/RMSomEvang.html
Bible Translation |
Translation of Bareis: Verse 6 |
Translation of Bareis: Verse 9 |
Smith & Goodspeed |
Stood on our Dignity |
Burden |
Green’s Literal Translation |
Weight of Glory |
Burden |
New American Standard Bible |
Asserted our Authority |
Burden |
New Revised Standard Version |
Made Demands |
Burden |
Weymouth’s |
Stood on our Dignity |
Burden |
Amplified New Testament |
Asserted our Authority |
Burden |
Emphasized New Testament |
Assumed Dignity |
Burden |
The New Berkeley Version |
Claim Authority |
Burden |
The Living Bible |
Honor |
Burden |
The New English Bible |
Made Our Weight Felt |
Burden |