Skip to main content

The Gospel Without Hindrance

The Gospel Without Hindrance

Apostolic Tradition, Ministerial Example, and the Proof Standard for Money Texts

Introduction: a stricter proof standard

Scripture warns that apostolic teaching can be distorted (2 Peter 3:16), and that spiritual language can be weaponized for self interest (1 Timothy 6:5; Titus 1:11; 2 Peter 2:3). Especially is this true when money enters the frame, the interpreter is no longer a neutral reader: the teacher may materially benefit from the conclusion he is urging. That is a conflict of interest condition, and it requires a higher standard of proof, not cynicism, but sobriety.

Because the gospel aims at faith in Christ, Paul refuses anything that becomes a hindrance to belief. In 1 Corinthians 9:12 he names that danger directly as ἐγκοπή (enkopē), a hindrance, impediment, obstruction. The question is not merely what is permitted, but what preserves the gospel’s integrity, keeps doctrine from being shaped by gain, and trains the church into ordered life rather than disorder. Anything that is a hindrance to faith and knowledge of Jesus is disorderly within the church even though it might have a pretense of godliness. 

While this essay touches on the issue of money as hindrance it is about more, any practice, posture, or tradition that becomes a hindrance, between Christ and the ones He is calling—especially the weak, the new believer, and the child is categorized as disorderly conduct.

A litmus test of this is simple but uncomfortable: Jesus says, “Let the little children come to me… do not hinder them” (Matthew 19:14), and He warns that causing little ones to stumble is a severe offense (Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42; Luke 17:2). So look around the church. Are the children there? If they are not, why are they not? When they do come, is it because they are seeing Jesus, hearing truth with safety, and meeting love without transaction, or is it because we have learned to substitute food, entertainment, and pressure for spiritual life? 

Most people cannot navigate hypocrisy and coercion very well. At very early stages in life this is where the fiery darts of the devil can penetrate the soul and it becomes very difficult to correct later. Children feel things are off immediately; domination, law-based religion, and transactional ministry. If a generation builds churches where children do not come to Christ freely, or where they come only when bribed and entertained, then we need to look inwardly, was I raised properly and is this “tradition” functioning as a hindrance? The question becomes unavoidable: has our way of doing church—our authority, our law-patterns, our money-patterns—become a stumbling block to the very ones Christ commands us not to hinder?

1) The controlling text as formal logic: 2 Thessalonians 3:6–9

Paul issues a command in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ: the church must keep away from any brother walking ἀτάκτως (ataktōs), out of order, undisciplined, and not according to the tradition received (2 Thessalonians 3:6). Paul does not leave tradition vague; he defines it immediately by his ministerial conduct among them.

Definition of the tradition, what they received

Then Paul seals the logic

  • It was not because we do not have the right, but to give you in ourselves an example to imitate (2 Thessalonians 3:9)

Structure stated as premises

  • Premise 1: Withdraw from any brother walking ἀτάκτως contrary to tradition (2 Thessalonians 3:6)
  • Premise 2: Tradition is defined by apostolic practice: not eating bread δωρεάν, working so as not to burden (2 Thessalonians 3:8)
  • Premise 3: This practice is given as an example to imitate (2 Thessalonians 3:9)
  • Conclusion A church cannot treat living as a burden as normal, spiritual, or exempt for leaders, because the apostolic tradition that corrects disorder is itself a ministerial example of non burdening labor

This is why it is not safe to reduce the chapter to some members were lazy. Paul anchors discipline in the visible ministerial pattern he calls tradition.

2) Apostolic example as a generative rule in the church

Paul’s argument in 2 Thessalonians 3:6–9 does more than command discipline; it establishes a formation mechanism. The church is not shaped only by propositions, but by patterns embodied in leaders and then copied into the body.

The generative structure in the text

  • Rule norm: Keep away from any brother walking ἀτάκτως not according to the tradition (2 Thessalonians 3:6)
  • Transmission how tradition is received: You yourselves know how you ought to imitate us (2 Thessalonians 3:7)
  • Content what tradition is: Nor did we eat anyone’s bread δωρεάν but with toil and labor we worked that we might not be a burden (2 Thessalonians 3:8)
  • Purpose why the example exists: To give you in ourselves an example to imitate (2 Thessalonians 3:9)

This means tradition here is not merely what we taught, but what we modeled, a visible rule embodied in apostolic conduct.

Apostolic example → imitation → communal walk ordered or disorderly

Secondary implication stated carefully: if apostolic example is designed to generate order through imitation, then anti apostolic example, especially from leaders, predictably generates disorder through imitation. This is not the main thesis of 2 Thessalonians 3, but it follows from the text’s structure.

3) Hindrance: when ministry becomes transaction

Paul’s stated concern in 1 Corinthians 9:12 is not comfort or entitlement, but the gospel’s unhindered advance: we endure all things rather than put a hindrance ἐγκοπή (enkopē) in the way of the gospel of Christ (1 Corinthians 9:12). This word frames a major spiritual reality: a financial posture can block faith.

How living off others becomes a hindrance

  • It converts gift into transaction

    The gospel is proclaimed as grace, God’s gift, not a commodity (Ephesians 2:8–9; Romans 3:24). When a minister positions himself as financially owed, the message begins to feel like spiritual goods exchanged for money. Even without explicit words, the structure teaches transaction, and transaction undermines grace. Paul refuses practices that make people interpret the gospel as something sold. That is why he can speak of preaching free of charge as spiritually meaningful (1 Corinthians 9:18).

  • It creates conflict of interest suspicion that competes with belief

    Scripture warns that some will treat godliness as a means of gain (1 Timothy 6:5), teach for shameful gain (Titus 1:11), and exploit with deceptive words (2 Peter 2:3). When money dependence exists, hearers can suspect the message is tuned to revenue. Suspicion becomes an ἐγκοπή (hindrance) not because the gospel is weak, but because incentives distort credibility. Paul’s repeated not a burden ethic functions as a credibility guardrail (1 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8; Acts 20:33–35; 2 Corinthians 11:7–9).

  • It trains disorder by example and normalizes idleness

    2 Thessalonians 3:6–12 does not only correct disorder; it prevents it by establishing a tradition of labor and non burdening. When leaders invert that pattern, they teach the body that dependence is normal, entitlement is holy, and extraction is ministry. That feeds the disorder Paul commands the church to resist.

  • It cultivates entitlement which then corrupts doctrine and tone

    Entitlement pressures interpretation. It tempts teachers to select texts that protect income, soften warnings about gain, and harden language that pressures giving. Scripture anticipates this: gain produces teaching that should not be taught (Titus 1:11) and exploitation through persuasive religious speech (2 Peter 2:3). When doctrine becomes income protection, the gospel is hindered.

  • It generates resentment that becomes spiritual noise

The conscience of the hearer is not irrelevant. “I worked hard for my money; this person wants to live off me” is a moral perception about justice and responsibility. It is the same kind of perception many people have toward welfare entitlement: “I work hard, I pay taxes, and others are idle and live off the system.” Whether that perception is always accurate in every case is not the point here. The point is that it exists as a deep moral intuition about ordered life: labor, responsibility, contribution, and fairness.

Now place that same intuition inside the church. When ministers present themselves as owed, or structure ministry as ongoing dependence upon the saints, the hearer can experience it through the same moral lens: “I work hard to provide for my family; why is this person living off my labor?” If the minister’s posture resembles entitlement—expectation, pressure, immunity from scrutiny, or lifestyle claims detached from visible sacrifice—then the hearer does not merely disagree; he feels that something is unjust. That feeling of injustice becomes spiritual noise. Resentment becomes a rival lens through which the gospel is evaluated. People stop hearing Christ and start hearing the preacher’s lifestyle.

This is precisely where Paul’s language about burden and hindrance becomes concrete. When a minister becomes a weight upon the saints, the gospel can begin to feel like an extraction system rather than a free gift. The hearer’s conscience begins to associate “church” with the same frustrations he feels toward entitlement structures in society. That association may be morally messy, but it is spiritually powerful: it can produce suspicion, withdrawal, and offense. And once the hearer’s mind is occupied with the sense of being used, the message of grace is no longer heard as grace. It is heard as transaction, as leverage, as entitlement. That is a hindrance, because faith is being obstructed not by Christ, but by the perceived injustice of the messenger’s posture.

Paul’s Thessalonian example directly addresses this: he refuses to become a weight upon the saints (2 Thessalonians 3:8). That refusal is part of the apostolic tradition meant to be imitated (2 Thessalonians 3:9). 

4) Rights, legalism, and Spirit shaped restraint: 1 Corinthians 8:9 and 1 Corinthians 9:12

In 1 Corinthians 8:9 Paul warns that this right can become a stumbling block (1 Corinthians 8:9). Paul is not denying that a right exists (it does in context of Mosaic Law priestly service); he is denying that having a right is the governing principle for Christian conduct. A right can be exercised in a way that looks like lawful authority, I am permitted therefore I will do it, yet still contradicts the gospel’s Spirit shaped ethic of love.

This highlights a difference between legalism and Spirit living. A claimed right can be exercised in a Mosaic posture, asserted authority, demanded benefit. Yet this does not fit the gospel of grace and can become a hindrance. Paul’s governing principle is love, not entitlement.

Difference between law based reasoning and Spirit shaped reasoning

  • Law based reasoning. I have a right therefore I will exercise it
  • Spirit shaped reasoning. Even if I have a right I will not use it if it becomes a stumbling block, a hindrance or an obstacle to faith

Paul’s gospel logic is explicit: love limits liberty for the sake of another’s conscience (1 Corinthians 8:9–13). He applies the same principle to his own ministry practice: he will endure hardship rather than place an ἐγκοπή in the way of the gospel (1 Corinthians 9:12). Rights can be real while their exercise can still be wrong, because the gospel is not governed by legalistic entitlement but by Spirit formed love and the removal of obstacles to belief (Galatians 5:13; Galatians 5:6).

5) Hindrance and stumbling across Scripture including little ones

Paul’s ἐγκοπή in 1 Corinthians 9:12 belongs to a wider Scriptural family of stumble, offense, obstacle language. The point is consistent: God’s will is that access to Him not be blocked by human systems, especially for the weak and the young.

Jesus says Let the children come to me do not hinder them (Matthew 19:14). He warns Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble (Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42; Luke 17:2). This is not mild language. Jesus frames hindering the vulnerable as a severe offense.

Paul likewise commands believers not to place an obstacle or stumbling block before others (Romans 14:13), and he warns that rights can become a stumbling block to the weak (1 Corinthians 8:9). This is the same moral universe: do not become the blockage between the vulnerable and Christ.

Children as the end goal test, what common church patterns produce

  • Law based living (Galatians 3:1–3; Galatians 5:1–4)
  • Authority that contradicts Matthew 20:25–28, lording over rather than serving

Children do not have the power or sophistication to navigate religious systems. When the church trains people to think belonging is earned, or models authority as domination, children learn: belonging is performance; authority is threat; religion is control. That produces distrust, transaction thinking, fear based spirituality, and offense at hypocrisy, the kinds of stumbling and hindrance Scripture treats with gravity.

Conclusion: the gospel without hindrance requires non burdening ministry

Paul’s stated aim is a gospel that runs unhindered into faith. Therefore he refuses anything that becomes an ἐγκοπή, a hindrance, especially financial structures that turn grace into transaction, inject conflict of interest into doctrine, and train the church into disorder. His Thessalonian tradition is explicit and imitable: do not eat bread δωρεάν; labor with κόπος and μόχθος; do not ἐπιβαρῆσαι burden the saints; and treat this as apostolic example meant to be copied (2 Thessalonians 3:8–9).

If the church wants the gospel without hindrance, it cannot treat ministerial entitlement as normal. It must return to apostolic tradition, not as a slogan, but as a demonstrable pattern of life that protects the message from distortion and protects the saints from exploitation.

Prayer for the Gospel Without Hindrance

Paraphrased prayer shaped by 2 Thessalonians 3:1–16

Lord Jesus Christ, we ask first that Your word would run swiftly and be honored, received, and believed, just as it was among the Thessalonians. Deliver us from unreasonable and wicked men, for not all have faith, and keep Your people steady in the midst of opposition. You are faithful; establish us and guard us from the evil one. Grant us confidence in You that we will both do and continue to do what You command, not by pressure of law, but by the power of Your Spirit. Direct our hearts into the love of God and into the steadfastness of Christ.

Father, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, order our walk so it matches the apostolic tradition. Keep us from disorder and idleness, and from every form of living as a burden upon others. Teach us to labor quietly, to do our own work, and to eat our own bread, so that the gospel is not hindered and the church is strengthened in peace. Give leaders the humility to serve without entitlement, and give the whole body the discernment to follow examples that reflect Christ.

Where there is disorder, correct us with truth and with love. Let discipline be medicinal, not vindictive: not treating a brother as an enemy, but admonishing him as a brother, that repentance and restoration may take root. And as we do good, keep us from growing weary. Make our fellowship real, our charity wise, and our consciences clean, so that no stumbling block is placed before the weak, the new believer, or the child.

Finally, Lord of peace, grant peace at all times in every way. Let Your presence govern our homes, our assemblies, our giving, and our ministry. Keep Your gospel free from transaction, free from manipulation, and free from shameful gain. May Your name be glorified, and may our lives be a living witness that Christ is sufficient. Amen.


Deep Dive 

A proof standard for anti distortion

Since the Bible warns about distortion for gain, the church must demand higher proof standards especially for money claims. The standard is simple: no leaps, no hidden premises, no coercion. We hear this all the time; we must read scripture in context. We can apply truth logic to scripture using premises and draw conclusions based on the "whole" truth.

Truth example, premises to conclusion

Premise A: Paul commands withdrawal from brothers walking ἀτάκτως contrary to apostolic tradition (2 Thessalonians 3:6)
Premise B: Paul defines that tradition as ministerial practice: not eating bread δωρεάν, working night and day, not burdening the saints (2 Thessalonians 3:8)
Premise C: Paul states this is an example to imitate (2 Thessalonians 3:9)
Premise D: Paul’s same unit explicitly targets idleness and commands that the able bodied who refuse to work should not eat, and that such people are to work quietly and eat their own bread (2 Thessalonians 3:10–12)

Premise E: C and D implies A and B thus applicable to all. When ministers reduce this passage to only “idle members,” while exempting leaders from the same tradition and example, they introduce an unstated exception the text does not give. This is the entitlement mindset of having a right. 

Premise F: Leadership posture is formative; an entitlement mindset at the top will predictably be reflected downward in the body, because Paul’s stated mechanism is imitation and example, not mere instruction (2 Thessalonians 3:7; 2 Thessalonians 3:9)

Conclusion: Any doctrine that normalizes ministerial entitlement, living as a burden upon the saints, contradicts the apostolic tradition Paul defines and commands the church to enforce, and it trains the very disorder the passage is meant to correct. 

Further clarification on where “entitlement” is sourced

Premise G: The entitlement mindset often appeals to “priestly right” language drawn from the Mosaic system: under that covenant, priests lived from the offerings and tithes appointed for that specific administration (Numbers 18:20–24; Deuteronomy 18:1–8)

Premise H: But that system is not carried over as a binding mechanism in Christ, because the covenant order has changed and the priesthood is fulfilled and transformed; in the new covenant all the people of God are constituted a priesthood in Christ (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6)

Premise I: Therefore, to rebuild priestly entitlement as a standing claim upon the saints is to re import a Mosaic privilege structure without its covenantal context, while simultaneously denying its built in constraints.

Premise J: Even within the Mosaic system itself, the priests’ portion was defined by God, and they had no inheritance in the land; the arrangement was structured, limited, and covenant specific (Numbers 18:20; Deuteronomy 18:1–2)

Conclusion: When ministers appeal to Mosaic priest entitlement to justify living off the saints, they are selecting the benefit while ignoring the covenant boundaries, effectively wanting the privilege without the constraints, which is precisely the kind of distortion of truth the scriptures speaks of and the very interpretive distortion the proof standard is designed to expose.

Nuance: Support, Relief, Hospitality, and the Non Entitlement Pattern

The main premise remains plain: Paul establishes a ministerial tradition by example, and commands imitation. He did not live off others as a burden, but worked so as not to weigh down the saints, and he frames this as a pattern the church is to receive and copy (2 Thessalonians 3:6–9). That is the controlling norm in this essay.

At the same time, Scripture includes real situations that require nuance, and none of them cancel Paul’s non entitlement pattern.

First, there is money collected for relief. Paul organizes and commends collections for saints under severe pressure, including those suffering loss of property and extreme hardship (2 Corinthians 8:1–4; 2 Corinthians 8:13–15; 2 Corinthians 9:12–13). This is not “funding a minister lifestyle.” It is the body supplying the afflicted, so that needs are met and suffering does not destroy faith.

Second, Paul himself received gifts, including while imprisoned. The Philippians sent support, and Paul calls it fellowship in his affliction and a fragrant offering to God (Philippians 4:14–18). Yet even here Paul carefully guards the heart of the matter: he is not speaking as if in need, he has learned contentment, and he seeks the fruit that increases to their account, not a system of pressure (Philippians 4:11; Philippians 4:17). Receiving a gift is not the same thing as entitlement.

Third, Jesus sent out the Twelve and told them not to rely on money, and that those who received them would meet immediate needs such as food and shelter (Matthew 10:9–10; Luke 10:7). That instruction actually reinforces the anti transactional principle: the messenger is not to build a money mechanism, but to move in dependence upon God and simple hospitality, refusing the posture of extraction. The supply is provision, not entitlement.

Fourth, priests lived off tithes and offerings under the Mosaic covenant, but that was a covenant specific administration with covenant specific boundaries, and it is not a blank check to rebuild entitlement under the new covenant (Numbers 18:20–24; Deuteronomy 18:1–2; 1 Peter 2:9). The question is not whether Israel had a priestly provision system. The question is whether that system is imported as an entitlement claim in the church, despite the apostolic example that explicitly refuses burdening and refuses gospel hindrance (2 Thessalonians 3:8–9; 1 Corinthians 9:12).

So the nuance is not a retreat from the main point. It is a clarification: Scripture shows relief for the persecuted, gifts to the imprisoned, and hospitality for itinerant proclamation. A commitment to help the poor. But none of these authorize a standing entitlement mindset in ministry. Paul’s pattern remains the interpretive anchor: he would rather suffer than become a burden, because the gospel must be preached without hindrance.

Lastly, the church in Jerusalem faced intense opposition, and many believers moved into a form of communal sharing: those who had property sold assets and laid the proceeds at the apostles’ feet, and distribution was made to each as any had need (Acts 2:44–45; Acts 4:32–35). Hebrews also describes believers who accepted the plundering of their property because they had a better and abiding possession (Hebrews 10:34). In that setting, the “economy” of the church was shaped by crisis, persecution, and need. The goal was not comfort but endurance, so that suffering did not collapse faith.

Within that communal reality, two truths operate together. First, leadership did not convert the common purse into personal entitlement while others needs did not get met. The apostles did not position themselves as owners of the funds; the resources were laid down for distribution to needs (Acts 4:35). Second, the church recognized that administration itself is work. When distribution created friction, the apostles did not seize the system and centralize power; they appointed servants to handle the daily ministry so that the apostles could devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the word (Acts 6:1–4). This is often misused as a proof text for “full time paid clergy,” but the text actually highlights something different: the church distinguished functions, appointed qualified servants, and protected the priority of word and prayer, while keeping the material flow accountable and need-oriented.

And even in a shared economy, Scripture does not treat work as optional. The same apostolic tradition that addresses communal sharing also warns against idleness. Paul’s command is not suspended because needs exist: if someone is able but refuses to work, he should not eat, and the able-bodied are commanded to work quietly and eat their own bread (2 Thessalonians 3:10–12). That means communal provision is not a sanctuary for entitlement. It is an emergency and mercy structure governed by order, contribution, and discipline, not by extraction.

Can we take Jerusalem as a model for today? Yes, but only with the right constraints. It can be a model in principle, not as a romantic blueprint.

What it models

  • Voluntary generosity under pressure, not coerced extraction (Acts 4:32–35; 2 Corinthians 9:7)

  • Relief aimed at genuine need, not lifestyle elevation (Acts 2:45; 2 Corinthians 8:13–15)

  • Visible accountability and delegated administration, not leader entitlement (Acts 6:1–4)

  • A community ethic where love bears burdens, but disorder and idleness are corrected (Acts 6:1–4; 2 Thessalonians 3:6–12)

What it does not model

  • A standing religious income mechanism where leaders claim entitlement as a right

  • A system where the able-bodied become dependents by default

  • A pattern where “ministry” becomes exemption from the apostolic tradition of not burdening

So if a modern church wants to learn from these, the question is not “do we pay leaders,” but “do we have a relief-oriented, accountable, need-governed structure (that obeys the commands of Jesus to love his brethren above all) that removes hindrance to faith, or have we built an entitlement economy that trains resentment and disorder?” The Jerusalem pattern strengthens the main thesis: when resources are shared, it is for endurance, mercy, and mission, governed by order and discipline, not by entitlement—and it must never ever become a hindrance between Christ and His people.

"He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches." (Revelation 3:14-22)

Popular (last 30 days)

Blessed Are The Forgiven

Blessed! the one whose lawless deeds are forgiven and the one whose sins are covered over, blessed is the man whom sin, the Lord will not consider . * Paul writes David foresaw and spoke " blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered . *  Blessed, is the one whom sin is not considered, this word considered  means "to credit, count, reckon, to set down as a matter of account; regard, think, consider." This blessing comes through faith and according to grace, " also David speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God considers righteousness apart from works ." *  The word for  lawless deeds speaks of the violation of the Law and the word for sin  speaks of missing the mark of God's righteousness. Blessed are those who (by faith in Christ according to grace) have been forgiven. In Him receiving the redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of trespasses according to the riches of His grace . * This fundamental ...
Read more

The Tripartite Nature of Humanity: Spirit, Soul, and Body

The Tripartite Nature of Humanity: Spirit, Soul, and Body in Biblical Understanding The human being, as depicted in the Bible, is a multifaceted creation, often understood through the distinct yet interconnected components of spirit, soul, and body. While some theological perspectives lean towards a bipartite view (soul and body), which we do see in the Old Testament, a careful examination of the New Testament scripture reveals a compelling case for a tripartite understanding, where each is divided into or composed of three parts. Let’s explore the biblical distinction between spirit, soul, and body. The Body: Our Earthly Vessel The body is the physical form that interacts with the material world. From the very beginning, Genesis 2:7 states, " Then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being ." This verse clearly establishes the body's origin from the earth, emphasizing its connec...
Read more

Lord, Stand By Me

"... present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness ." 1 This word for present means "I bring, present, come up to and stand by," it is parístēmi (from pará, "from close-beside" and hístēmi, "to stand") – properly, stand close beside, i.e. ready to present (exhibit). I pray Lord stand by me which expresses that I put my trust in Him, or I come up to and stand by Him. We use phrases like surrendering or bowing at the cross to explain such a moment, surely it is a coming to the end of ourselves and it is desirable that I find His will acceptable, but it is important to understand that it is about trust, not my will power, the key is that it is in Christ. The terminology the scriptures use is "present yourselves to God," or come up to and stand by and walk with Him. "... present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God--this...
Read more

Spirit of Life

" Indeed, the law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus liberates from the law of sin and death ." 1 This word for liberates "I free, set free, liberate" is from a root word meaning free, exempt, not bound by an obligation. As partakers of God's divine nature, being born of Spirit, we are no longer obligated to the sinful nature but to righteousness which is God's nature. When we believe we receive the Spirit of promise, a guarantee of our inheritance, a great testimony that we are His children, it is a Spirit of Life. " Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life." 24 The Son came not to condemn the world but to save it. "One trespass   led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. " 6 " He was delivered over to death for our trespasses and wa...
Read more

The Church as Glory and Joy: Paul's Vision of Ministry Reward

The Church as Glory and Joy: Paul’s Vision of Ministry Reward A Theological Essay on Ministry, Servant Leadership, and the True Reward of Equipping the Saints Introduction Distortion of scripture is nothing new, Peter himself warned that Paul’s letters were being twisted even in the first century—some “distort” them, as they do “the other Scriptures” (2 Peter 3:16). Paul likewise warned that distortions would arise from within the church, with people speaking “twisted things” to draw disciples after themselves (Acts 20:29–30). And when the subject turns to money, the New Testament is especially direct. Paul cautions against those who imagine “godliness” as a means of gain (1 Timothy 6:5) and insists that gospel ministry must not be peddled for profit (2 Corinthians 2:17). Peter adds that false teachers exploit others “in their greed” (2 Peter 2:3), and Jude warns of those who “abandoned themselves for the sake of gain” (Jude 11). Paul also wrote some “teach… for shameful gain” ...
Read more

All Who Are Thirsty

“ Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters;  and he who has no money,  come, buy and eat!  Come, buy wine and milk  without money and without price.  Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread,  and your labor for that which does not satisfy?  Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good,  and delight yourselves in rich food. .." (Isaiah 55). " Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price ." Buy is defined as to acquire the ownership of by giving an accepted price or consideration therefore; to accept or believe as true .[ 1 ] When we buy something we consider the price that we must pay, we accept this and purchase the thing we have considered worthy of the sacrifice we make in payment. W e can not buy, with money or price, redemption from t his tragic flaw we are born into. However Jesus paid the price for us, so we buy or accept through consideration, the Greek word is  logizomai.[ 2] ...
Read more

True Widows: A Biblical Perspective

True Widows: A Biblical Perspective Throughout Scripture, God's compassion for widows is evident. He is portrayed as their defender, provider, and source of justice. The Bible repeatedly calls believers to care for widows, reflecting God's own heart for the vulnerable. However, in his letter to Timothy, the Apostle Paul provides a specific definition of a "true" widow, emphasizing the church's responsibility in supporting those who are genuinely in need. God's Compassion for Widows The Old Testament is rich with passages that reveal God's concern for widows. In Exodus 22:22, God commands, "You shall not afflict any widow or fatherless child." This verse underscores His protective nature, ensuring that widows are not mistreated or neglected. Similarly, Deuteronomy 10:18 declares, "He administers justice for the fatherless and the widow, and loves the stranger, giving him food and clothing." Here, God is depicted as a just and loving prov...
Read more

Sound Doctrine, Sound Minds, and the Word of Life

Sound Doctrine, Sound Minds, and the Word of Life The New Testament consistently links doctrine with the condition of the mind . Doctrine is never treated as a mere collection of correct statements to be affirmed, but as something formative—shaping how believers reason, how faith matures, and whether communities are built up or quietly destabilized. When doctrine is unsound—loosely grounded, selectively quoted, or driven by human agendas—it does not simply introduce error. It produces instability. Scripture describes this instability not as ignorance, but as a condition of being divided , tossed , and unsettled . The danger is not thinking too much, but thinking without a stable center . Murmuring, Confused Reasoning, and the Loss of Orientation Paul names this danger directly in Philippians: “Do all things without murmuring (γογγυσμός) and confused reasoning (διαλογισμός)… holding fast to the word of life.” — Philippians 2:14–16 The terms Paul uses are precise. The word mur...
Read more

The Promises of God — The Gospel Without Monetary Cost

Conversion, Gift, Priesthood, and the Stumbling Block of Money I. The Gospel Announced as Without Cost in Scripture The gospel is revealed in Scripture as without cost , without price , and without exchange . This is not rhetorical flourish, nor merely ethical exhortation, but a declaration about the nature of divine life and the way it is received. Isaiah proclaims to covenant-breaking Israel: “Ho! Everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.” Isaiah 55:1 The command to “buy” while explicitly possessing “no money” abolishes transactional logic. What is offered is life from God, not a commodity. The absence of price is essential to the nature of what is given. If payment were possible, the gift would cease to be what it is. This prophetic declaration stands prior to any later ecclesial practice. It defines the category of the gospel before questions of ministry, support, or organization a...
Read more

Divine Persuasion

" I say to you there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner repenting. " 2 This word for repent is metanoéō (from metá, "changed after being with" and noiéō, "think.") Oh many have misused this word. We are changed after being with Jesus. The woman at the well was changed after being with Jesus. The Bible says repentance is of the will of God, without regret. This word for " without regret " means not to be repented of, about which no change of mind can take place. Repentance like faith, a Divine Persuasion. Repentance is a change of mind that we do not change our minds about, or repent of. We know that the mind regulates the heart and the word of God discerns the thoughts and intentions of the heart thus it is through the mind the power of God is manifested in our hearts. Through the mind we are divinely persuaded or convinced of God. " Indeed, according to God the heart-sorrow repentance  without regret produces  salvation,...
Read more