Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Matthew 10:10 could just as easily be interpreted to say the worker need not take his own things because he should expect to be supported by those his ministers to. Otherwise, why did the Lord tack on "for the worker is worthy of his food." In your interpretation, that phrase doesn't fit, except to say that the worker isn't worth much.
To me these verses have nothing to do with austerity. To me they are saying that a worker should expect the Lord to provide his needs as he ministers through the people he ministers to.
|
Maybe it would help you if you pray-read these verses again. 
Igzy, you used I Tim 5.18 to support JM's many entitlements, and I went thru the Bible exploring where this thought was used. You called me biased for my simple reading of the scripture. Never once have I mandated that all ministers of the Lord live an austere life. I only exposed JM's numerous extravagances as being contrary to the way of the Lord, and have no support in the New Testament.
You are free to interpret the Bible as you choose. You are free to follow any minister you choose. We will just have to agree to disagree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
The fact is, Ohio, you have a bias. I think it goes back to Nee and Lee and the LC and you have never reconsidered it. You see these verses and interpret them through a particular prism, and you have no interest in questioning the prism.
Some people believe the prosperity gospel, some the austerity gospel. I think you are in the latter category.
|
I have 2,000 years of church history composed of millions of faithful brothers and sisters who are with me in the latter category.
You have Joyce Meyer with her entourage of stylists, valets, designers, and concierges. And let's not forget her team of PR lawyers to maintain her best "Christian" image.