Why pastors and preachers should not be receiving salaries

[dcontroversal]

Invariably when I see this subject come up the OP uses the premise that NO pastor should receive a salary because a fraction of one percent of pastors either embezzle money or receive ridiculously large salaries. If you were to look at the total number of churches just here in the United States and then compare that number to the number of churches that most of us would question their financial practices the percentage would be a fraction of one percent.

Most congregations pay their pastor (for those that actually have a full time paid pastor) a salary that would be reasonable for the area the church is located in and of course, in most churches the pastor does not have direct access to the church bank accounts.

At least at the church that I attend, the only access that pastoral staff have to church funds is via a credit card for reasonable expenses and the bill for that card goes to to the church bookkeeper for payment and even the bookkeeper is double checked by another person who has access to the financial records but not direct spending access. Even the offering between collection and deposit goes through multiple layers of accountability to insure full transparency.

AMEN.....same in the churches I have been in....the preacher must bring any expenditure over $500 before the congregation and ask for the funds and then it is discussed and voted upon by the membership...his salary has been set by the church and he has no access to the bank account. Usually a deacon is appointed as a treasurer with an assistant treasurer that also must sign every check that gets used. AND every month a business meeting takes place where any and all business of the church takes place, both spiritual and financial.....

 

[TheIndianGirl]

If pastors are not paid, how are they supposed to support themselves and/or their families? Or is the spouse expected to fully support financially? Benefits funded by taxpayer? I think if they are working the full week, they should get paid. Especially in small and medium churches, pastors do a lot of administrative work. Their benefits, if any, are not as good as someone working in a regular company. For ex, my pastor does not get matching 401K and the health insurance only covers her. I think median salary in the area where pastor is preaching is fair.

 

[Marcelo]

Nowadays, they may forgo compensation, but they choose to sell books. The church also heavily promotes those books among the members.

So you wonder sometimes whether having a salary from the church may be better, for transparency

Yes, it is better to pay a salary to a pastor than to have an unpaid minister promoting his books from the pulpit.

 

[presidente]

All of God’s priests, apostles and prophets were allowed to receive material goods from believers because they had the primary job of preaching the truth and the Gospel. Those material goods were received ONLY to satisfy their most basic needs like food, water, clothing and shelter.

But modern day constitutional Churches turned the job of preaching into an enterprise, and instead of receiving material things to satisfy only basic needs, pastors and teachers are getting rich from preaching while most of the hearers who give them money are poorer than them or live in poverty. The poor are ignored while the preachers get millions of income. This is against the very teachings of Jesus and His apostles. Even the apostle Paul supported his ministry through tent making, to set a good example.

Repent you leaders of the church.

Constitutional church? What's that? Do the preachers at these churches wrap themselves in the American flag and claim the US Constitution is inspired by God like the Mormons do?

I don't know the stats, but I seem to recall reading that a huge percentage of churches are very tiny and have bi-'vocational' pastors. You see some of the rich ones on TV, but that doesn't mean most preachers are rich. It's typically provides only a very modest livelihood if that.

'Time' in Greek (pronounced kind of like 'tea may' but without the dipthong 'y' sound, probably, that English speakers do not realize we put on the ends of such words) is translated 'honor.' Going back to the Illiad, it can refer to material possessions given to express honor. Achilles was given spoils of war, treasure and a captive girl, as 'time' for prowess in battle in the poem. After criticizing the general, it was taken from him, and he refused to fight until on older friend who helped raise him was killed.

I Timothy 5 speaks of 'honoring' widows, putting the ones that met certain qualifications on a list. Apparently those on the list would receive material support. The same chapter says that the elders that rule well are worthy of double honor especially those that minister in preaching and teaching. In Jerusalem, widows were cared for with a daily distribution of food. The apostles ate and drank as they traveled. Paul argued for the right of apostles to bring a wife with them also when he pointed out the fact that Cephas and the Lord's brothers did so.

 

[presidente]

Btw, I just heard a testimony from Francis Chan in one of his messages in which he said that he prayed for a new generation of rich Christians who would give all their money away, or why not just make him (Chan) rich and he'd give it all away. He said he did not know that he knew how to write well. But he wrote a book and it did well and it ended up on the New York Times Best Seller list. So the next year, he made a million dollars. He told his wife his prayer and said they had to give it away. So he put it in a charitable trust to give it away.

 

[JohnR7]

Many of the richest pastors made their riches on books, not salaries.

A lot of books are a sham. There is little or no real information in them. My brother wrote a text book once. It took him three years to do the research. By the time you put that much work into it, you don't really make any money.

 

[JesusLives]

Does gaining millions of income from preaching sound like making a LIVING to you? I do agree with pastors being supported by the church, but I would support them with ACTUAL MEALS and NECESSITIES rather than money. Because anything beyond meals and necessities makes them greedy.

You can't pay for a roof over your head with a meal. Some pastors rent and don't even own a home but they deserve to have the funds to be able to stay out of the weather and it is a little difficult to walk every where you need to go so pastors also need a car and money to pay for gas and insurance. They and their families may also need health insurance and I haven't been able to pay my premium with a chicken or a loaf of bread it is impractical for you to expect a pastor to live like the disciples did back in Jesus time.

 

[Judges1318]

I don’t own any cars or property for that matter.

Not an Audi......an Aldi!
A grocery store called Aldi.

 

[Jimbone]

I don't count those as pastors, I count them as wolves.
When I say a pastor, I mean a diligent man of God doing the work of the ministry, delivering the truth of the Gospel, visiting widows, and orphans, and hospital bed sides, attending funerals, and weddings, and is there for God's flock daily, and many times even in the night.

I was using an extreme example, and I understand. I would also like to just make sure I clearly see and believe that Jesus will take care of everyone the serves Him, and He clearly says that this is Gods way, that the preacher should be paid. I do wan to

Of course I can see the difference. The OP seems to lump in most pastors with that fringe though.

You know what, after your answer here, I apologize for my condescending tone here. Rereading it I'm almost embarrassed by putting it like that. At the time I didn't see it, but I could have made that point without the over dramatic wording. I will try to be more aware of this moving forward because it's just not respectful at all. I am sorry about this brother and hope you have a good day.

 

[Dino246]

A lot of books are a sham. There is little or no real information in them. My brother wrote a text book once. It took him three years to do the research. By the time you put that much work into it, you don't really make any money.

These things don't change the fact that many big-name rich pastors got rich not off their congregations, but off their book sales.

 

[Dino246]

You know what, after your answer here, I apologize for my condescending tone here. Rereading it I'm almost embarrassed by putting it like that. At the time I didn't see it, but I could have made that point without the over dramatic wording. I will try to be more aware of this moving forward because it's just not respectful at all. I am sorry about this brother and hope you have a good day.

No worries, friend, and thanks for owning it. I have to bite my tongue (fingers) at times too, and don't always do so. We're all growing in grace.

 

[tourist]

Not an Audi......an Aldi!
A grocery store called Aldi.

Amusing post of the day award.

 

[presidente]

I use them only for basic needs.

Why would it not be a sin to 'participate in an evil system' to meet basic needs? If cash is an unjust weight, why would you be able to use unjust weights in the market?

Isn't that where the command originally applied on a day-to-day or week-to-week basis. The people who lived in the city would buy so many homers of grain for so much weight of silver. The homers had to be the right size. The weights had to be right. A vendor with a fake shekel that was a little too light was violating the commandment. Weights were frequently used for basic needs.

 

[rily51jean]

That's a quote from scripture.

I'm sure 2000 years ago they may have used some terms differently than we do today. It's possible that the writer could have been referring to the ox pulling a cart or wagon through the field as the grain was harvested. Some versions say "treads out"

None the less I'm not interested in semantics. You can deal with God about how his word is written, and translated .

What was written to Timothy was a directive for paying those who preach and teach. You can deal with God on that subject as well.

That's a quote from scripture.

I'm sure 2000 years ago they may have used some terms differently than we do today. It's possible that the writer could have been referring to the ox pulling a cart or wagon through the field as the grain was harvested. Some versions say "treads out"

None the less I'm not interested in semantics. You can deal with God about how his word is written, and translated .

What was written to Timothy was a directive for paying those who preach and teach. You can deal with God on that subject as well.

Well, this is what Isaiah 28:27-28 has to say about the treatment of different grains, although this was also a symbolic of how the Lord deals with different people:
Isaiah 28:26 "For his God doth instruct him to discretion, and doth teach him.
Vs. 27 For the fitches are not threshed with a threshing instrument, neither is a cart wheel turned about upon the cummin; but the fitches are beaten out with a staff, and the cummin with a rod.
Vs. 28 Bread corn is bruised; because he will not ever be threshing it, nor break it with the wheel of his cart, nor bruise it with his horsemen.
Vs. 29 This also cometh forth from the LORD of hosts, Which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working."

E.W. Bullinger's note: Vs. 28 Bread = corn. Bread is put by fig. Metonymy (of Effect), Ap. 6, for the corn of which it is made. Cp. Job 28.5
bruised = crushed: i.e. reduced to powder Cp. Ex. 32.20 2 Kings 23.6 Render, as a question: Is corn crushed?
because = nay. The Heb. accent tebir is disjunctive and requires this rendering. Cp. R.V. marg., and Job 22.2
ever = forever
Vs. 29 This: i.e. this same design in His treatment of His people. His purpose is the same as that of the husbandman. Cp. Amos 9.9.
excellent = lofty.
working = wisdom. The sort of wisdom which carries the purpose through to permanency. Heb. tushiyah
See note on Prov. 2. 7.

Per Matthew Henry's Commentary, p. 123:
2. "In his threshing, v. 27, 28. This also he proportions to the grain that is to be threshed out. The fitches and the cummin, being easily got out of their husk or ear, are only threshed with a staff and a rod; but the bread-corn requires more force, and therefore that must be bruised with a threshing instrument, a sledge shod with iron, that was drawn to and fro over it, to beat out the corn; and yet he will not be ever threshing it, nor any longer than is necessary to loosen the corn from the chaff; he will not break it or crush it into the ground with the wheel of his cart, nor bruise it to pieces with his horsemen; the grinding of it is reserved for another operation. Observe, by the way, what pains are to be taken, not only for the earning, but for the preparing of our necessary food; and yet, after all, it is meat that perishes. Shall we then grudge to labour much more for the meat which endures to everlasting life? Bread-corn is bruised. Christ was so; it pleased the Lord to bruise him, that he might be the bread of life to us."



Deu. 25:4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.

Per Matthew Henry's Commentary, pp. 644-645:
"II. A charge to husbandmen not to hinder their cattle from eating when they were working, if meat were within their reach, v. 4. This instance of the beast that trod out the corn (to which there is an allusion in that of the prophet, Hos. 10:11) is put for all similar instances. That which makes this law very remarkable above its fellows (and which countenances the like application of other such laws) is that it is twice quoted in the New Testament to show that it is the duty of people to give their ministers a comfortable maintenance, 1 Cor. 9:9, 10, and 1 Tim. 5:17, 18. It teaches us in the letter of it to make much of the brute-creatures that serve us, and to allow them not only the necessary supports for their life, but the advantages of their labour; and thus we must learn not only to be just, but kind, to all that are employed for our good, not only to maintain but to encourage them, especially those that labor among us in the word and doctrine, and so are employed for the good of our better part."

 

[Locoponydirtman]

Well, this is what Isaiah 28:27-28 has to say about the treatment of different grains, although this was also a symbolic of how the Lord deals with different people:
Isaiah 28:26 "For his God doth instruct him to discretion, and doth teach him.
Vs. 27 For the fitches are not threshed with a threshing instrument, neither is a cart wheel turned about upon the cummin; but the fitches are beaten out with a staff, and the cummin with a rod.
Vs. 28 Bread corn is bruised; because he will not ever be threshing it, nor break it with the wheel of his cart, nor bruise it with his horsemen.
Vs. 29 This also cometh forth from the LORD of hosts, Which is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working."

E.W. Bullinger's note: Vs. 28 Bread = corn. Bread is put by fig. Metonymy (of Effect), Ap. 6, for the corn of which it is made. Cp. Job 28.5
bruised = crushed: i.e. reduced to powder Cp. Ex. 32.20 2 Kings 23.6 Render, as a question: Is corn crushed?
because = nay. The Heb. accent tebir is disjunctive and requires this rendering. Cp. R.V. marg., and Job 22.2
ever = forever
Vs. 29 This: i.e. this same design in His treatment of His people. His purpose is the same as that of the husbandman. Cp. Amos 9.9.
excellent = lofty.
working = wisdom. The sort of wisdom which carries the purpose through to permanency. Heb. tushiyah
See note on Prov. 2. 7.

Per Matthew Henry's Commentary, p. 123:
2. "In his threshing, v. 27, 28. This also he proportions to the grain that is to be threshed out. The fitches and the cummin, being easily got out of their husk or ear, are only threshed with a staff and a rod; but the bread-corn requires more force, and therefore that must be bruised with a threshing instrument, a sledge shod with iron, that was drawn to and fro over it, to beat out the corn; and yet he will not be ever threshing it, nor any longer than is necessary to loosen the corn from the chaff; he will not break it or crush it into the ground with the wheel of his cart, nor bruise it to pieces with his horsemen; the grinding of it is reserved for another operation. Observe, by the way, what pains are to be taken, not only for the earning, but for the preparing of our necessary food; and yet, after all, it is meat that perishes. Shall we then grudge to labour much more for the meat which endures to everlasting life? Bread-corn is bruised. Christ was so; it pleased the Lord to bruise him, that he might be the bread of life to us."



Deu. 25:4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.

Per Matthew Henry's Commentary, pp. 644-645:
"II. A charge to husbandmen not to hinder their cattle from eating when they were working, if meat were within their reach, v. 4. This instance of the beast that trod out the corn (to which there is an allusion in that of the prophet, Hos. 10:11) is put for all similar instances. That which makes this law very remarkable above its fellows (and which countenances the like application of other such laws) is that it is twice quoted in the New Testament to show that it is the duty of people to give their ministers a comfortable maintenance, 1 Cor. 9:9, 10, and 1 Tim. 5:17, 18. It teaches us in the letter of it to make much of the brute-creatures that serve us, and to allow them not only the necessary supports for their life, but the advantages of their labour; and thus we must learn not only to be just, but kind, to all that are employed for our good, not only to maintain but to encourage them, especially those that labor among us in the word and doctrine, and so are employed for the good of our better part."

This is irrelevant to the subject.
We are discussing pastoral salaries.
Speak to the subject matter at hand.

 

[rily51jean]

About "semantics", well, regardless if you think they are or are not important, the fact is "semantics" are very important for correct understanding of God's word. Here is how Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary defines "semantic"/"semantics":

se-man-tic \si-'mant-ik\ adj [Gk semantikos significant, fr. semainein to signify, mean, fr. sema sign, token; akin to Skt dhyati he thinks] 1 : of or relating to meaning in language-- compare FORMAL1b(2) 2 : of or relating to semantics -- semantical \-i-kel\ adj se-mant-i-cal-ly \-k(e-)le\ adv

se-man-tics \si-'mant-iks\ n pl but sing or pl in constr 1 : the study of meanings: a : the historical and psychological study and the classification of changes in the signification of words or forms viewed as factors in linguistic development b (1) : SEMIOTIC (2) : a branch of semiotic dealing with the relations between signs and what they refer to and including theories of denotation, extension, naming, and truth 2 : GENERAL SEMANTICS 3 a : the meaning or relationship of meanings of a sign or set of signs; esp : connotative meaning b : the exploitation of connotation and ambiguity (as in propaganda)

So, when it comes to understanding the truth of God's word in the bible, semantics is very important, and consideration of the meaning of words as given and used in the Hebrew and the Greek for the colloquialism used in the language and dialects of their time is all important.

 

[rily51jean]

This is irrelevant to the subject.
We are discussing pastoral salaries.
Speak to the subject matter at hand.

Well, it is connected to the subject of pastoral salaries, as pointed out by Matthew Henry in his Commentary which I provided.
Not only that but, originally, when the Levites were chosen by God to minister to him as priests in His tabernacle, and later in his temple, Numbers 18:1-7, the priest's office was given to Aaron and his sons as a gift.
God made provision for them from the offerings for sacrifices that were brought to the Temple, by the congregation, Numbers 18:8-19.
In Num. 18:19 God states "All the heave offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto the LORD, have I given thee, and thy sons and thy daughters with thee, by a statute for ever: it is a covenant of salt for ever before the LORD unto thee and to thy seed with thee."
Then in Vs. 20: "And the LORD spake unto Aaron, "Thou shalt have no inheritance in their land, neither shalt thou have any part among them: I am thy part and thine inheritance among the children of Israel."
Vs. 21: And, behold I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the tabernacle of the congregation."
Vs. 24: " But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance." Vs. 25-26 The Lord instructs Moses to tell the Levites, to offer up a 1/10th heave offering out of the 1/10th tithe that they receive from the congregation, also in Numbers 18:30:
Therefore thou shalt say unto them, 'When ye have heaved the best thereof from it, then it shall be counted unto the Levites as the increase of the threshingfloor, and as the increase of the winepress. 31 And ye shall eat of it in every place, ye and your households: for it is your reward for your service in the tabernacle of the congregation. 32 And ye shall bear no sin by reason of it, when ye have heaved from it the best of it : neither shall ye pollute the holy things of the children of Israel, lest ye die.''
And so, that's how that originated. But, you only tithe to where you are being fed/taught the true word of God, you don't owe it to support some guy that spouts 2 verses and babbles hot air for the next 45 minutes, because he's just doing it as a job, or a career. Today there's lots of "Pastors" out there that don't even believe the Bible, don't even believe in God, and yet they oversee a church for money. Those are the people you don't owe tithes, or a salary.

 

[Locoponydirtman]

Well, it is connected to the subject of pastoral salaries, as pointed out by Matthew Henry in his Commentary which I provided.
Not only that but, originally, when the Levites were chosen by God to minister to him as priests in His tabernacle, and later in his temple, Numbers 18:1-7, the priest's office was given to Aaron and his sons as a gift.
God made provision for them from the offerings for sacrifices that were brought to the Temple, by the congregation, Numbers 18:8-19.
In Num. 18:19 God states "All the heave offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto the LORD, have I given thee, and thy sons and thy daughters with thee, by a statute for ever: it is a covenant of salt for ever before the LORD unto thee and to thy seed with thee."
Then in Vs. 20: "And the LORD spake unto Aaron, "Thou shalt have no inheritance in their land, neither shalt thou have any part among them: I am thy part and thine inheritance among the children of Israel."
Vs. 21: And, behold I have given the children of Levi all the tenth in Israel for an inheritance, for their service which they serve, even the service of the tabernacle of the congregation."
Vs. 24: " But the tithes of the children of Israel, which they offer as an heave offering unto the LORD, I have given to the Levites to inherit: therefore I have said unto them, Among the children of Israel they shall have no inheritance." Vs. 25-26 The Lord instructs Moses to tell the Levites, to offer up a 1/10th heave offering out of the 1/10th tithe that they receive from the congregation, also in Numbers 18:30:
Therefore thou shalt say unto them, 'When ye have heaved the best thereof from it, then it shall be counted unto the Levites as the increase of the threshingfloor, and as the increase of the winepress. 31 And ye shall eat of it in every place, ye and your households: for it is your reward for your service in the tabernacle of the congregation. 32 And ye shall bear no sin by reason of it, when ye have heaved from it the best of it : neither shall ye pollute the holy things of the children of Israel, lest ye die.''
And so, that's how that originated. But, you only tithe to where you are being fed/taught the true word of God, you don't owe it to support some guy that spouts 2 verses and babbles hot air for the next 45 minutes, because he's just doing it as a job, or a career. Today there's lots of "Pastors" out there that don't even believe the Bible, don't even believe in God, and yet they oversee a church for money. Those are the people you don't owe tithes, or a salary.

Fair enough on the above. As for the 2 verse and hot air guy, he is disqualified. I believe it is written in the letter to Timothy, works diligently in the word.
And if they don't believe the Bible they aren't Christians and this not pastors of the faith and therefore do not apply to this conversation. This is a Christian form not a non- Christian forum. I don't care what non- Christian speakers do except that they pose as Christian, and them I expose them as wolves where I find them.

 

[Ghoti2]

I never said a preacher’s needs should not be supplied. And what are those needs? Food, water, shelter and clothing. Anything beyond that is not a need, and pastors today have many things that don’t qualify as basic needs. Yet they call those things their needs and then use believers’ money to purchase luxury at the expense of those who don’t even have basic needs met.

You don't have a car or two? And a computer? And a TV? And a telephone? And, don't you eat out and go to different places that cost money? You aren't spending money on your kids? College for them? Do you take vacations? (and the list could go on, and on.)

But, you want to decide the limitations a preacher and his family must live within?

 

[Angela53510]

Except preaching the Gospel was never meant to be a job per se in the secular sense, it is a sharing of free gift from God not to be used for profit of any sort and true preachers who love God will not burden people beyond what is necessary for their basic needs.

I am also done with this stubbornness of refusing to admit the deceitfulness of wealth. Whether one loves money or not is evident by what they do, and asking for money from people is but one action that shows a love for money. Tell a second person that asking for money does not mean you love money and see how they will react. Please don't reply me with strawman arguments either.

"And he himself gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, that is, to build up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God—a mature person, attaining to the measure of Christ’s full stature." Eph. 4:11-13

And yet, according to Ephesians, there are special people appointed to do the work of pastoring, teaching, and evangelizing! Seems to me this is describing a job. I don't see how you can expect people to prepare sermons, visit the sick, marry people, teach and pray, but not pay them a living wage!

My church has about 150 members. We have a senior pastor and a youth/ children's ministry pastor. Besides preparing sermons, they have to meet the many needs of people in the church both inside and outside their job descriptions. We are adapting our church to be designated disability friendly. We want members of the disabled in church. We already have 4 or 5 people in wheels. But that is another huge thing that gets put back on the pastor's plate.

Just preparing a good sermon takes me up to 20 hours, plus much prayer. Our senior pastor is probably is quicker, our associate pastor probably slower than me. Plus, a pastor needs a good education, both in theology and the Bible, but also in hermeneutics, original languages, and tools for leading, like spiritual formation, teaching, preaching, counseling and evangelism. It's a long 3 years, if you do it all at once. I took 7 years to do my MDiv. One church I was in before I moved, the pastor had a PhD in preaching. Does anyone need that? Probably not! But he was by far the best pastor/preacher I've ever had. I had a friend from Peru I sat with. She was ESL, spoke broken English. The sermons were so excellent, that my friend got so much out of it, but the many retired pastors and missionaries as well as me got so much out of it.

Being a good preacher doesn't just come by praying the Holy Spirit will lead, when no thought or preparation has gone into it. But you want them to work a second job, be with their families, and work a basically full time job as a free pastor.
I have pension income from when I taught school. So, my preaching or teaching is free! But there is nothing wrong with someone who is called by God, who devote most of their time to the ministry in being paid!

It really irritates me when some newbie walks in here and is lecturing the forum in all kinds of weird and whacky made up nonsense. Get to know us. Nobody in this forum preaches wealth for pastors or themselves. While we may disagree on signs and healings, I do not remember anyone doing what you are saying. Perhaps if you had come into the forum and read the threads, and got to know people, you'd realize what a fool you have made of yourself.

We are simple people, love God, and serve him. Take your ministry of condemnation elsewhere. I hate the prosperity gospel with a passion. It is evil. But when I discuss it, I explain why the doctrine is not Scriptural, I don't scream at people and judge them! Try and ask God to give you an irenic spirit. You certainly need it!