It is definitely worth the trip.
2Thessalonians 3:10 says “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.”
We have been conditioned to think they do not eat because they have not been paid money with which to buy food, because people today are almost always paid with money. Paul did not say “neither should he be paid”. The true meaning of this verse is that the pay was the food – the daily bread, and this is consistent with other scriptures as well as much of history.
During the Great Depression, for example, people worked on farms just for food, a place to stay, and twenty five cents a day. So payment in basic necessities is not a concept that is unknown.
Another possible example: Luke 12:41-42 “And the Lord said, Who then is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall set over his household, to give them their portion of food in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.”
This scripture implies that food was the payment of the household staff. That is in line with Jesus’ instructions in Matthew 10:10, and Luke 10:7. Luke
10:7 in which Jesus says “and in the self same house abide ye, eating and drinking such things as they have; for worthy is the laborer of his hire“. There is no guesswork here. This is not an implication, but a flat-out statement that room and board constituted their pay.
John 10:1-8 Says that any preacher that does not abide in the instructions of Jesus first and foremost is a “thief and robber”. This is referring in part to preachers for profit; any of them who accept money as personal gain for preaching.
Paul sums up the sentiment of a true worker for Christ in 1Timothy 6:8 – “having food and raiment let us be therewith content.”.
Actually, I have short-changed you a bit with that scripture. Let us look at 1Timothy 6:3-12 in its full context because it really spells it all out:
“If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness [a non-materialistic, moneyless lifestyle mentioned above]; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, Perverse
disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that [financial] gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
But godliness with contentment [non-materialism] is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.
But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.”
Paul is not going so far as even addressing the subject of a tithe fraud, he is talking about plain old religion-based capitalism of any sort: preachers who want to prosper financially from preaching.
So, having had their way with the word “hire” they then proceed to abuse the word “honor” in 1Timothy 5:17 by claiming that the word there means a monetary payment: “Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor,
especially they who labor in the word and doctrine.”
The Greek word for “honor” in that scripture is Strong’s #5092, which is very close in meaning to #5091 which means to regard as valuable, or to esteem highly as being precious. The difference being that #5092 has the added connotation of recognizing a value by paying respect or expressing appreciation for the person’s worth. It can represent monetary payment, but is also used figuratively, according to Strong’s as “esteem of the highest degree”. This would certainly be the case in this instance, given the context and circumstances.
One is an inner feeling, and the other is an outward expression of that feeling. Acts 28:10 is a good example: “Who also honored  us with many honors ; and when we departed, they laded us with such things as were necessary.”
The second half of that verse (and when we departed…) is not directly tied to the thought in the first half, so it is not like they were “laded with honors”.
They outwardly paid them honor, with words expressing their inner feelings of appreciation that they had for these men.
The point is that there is no indication of money involved. If there was, it would be only as much as necessary to cover the immediate overhead costs, for instance to pay their way as ship passengers.
As an additional note, look again at the second half of Acts 28:10 above:
“Who also honored us with many honors; and when we departed, they laded us with such things as were necessary.”
Paul healed many of these people, and they showered him with honors of appreciation, but they only “laded us with such things as were necessary”. It sounds like no bags of money, or jewels, or credit account at the bank, or other material wealth as the pro-tithers would have us believe. It involved just enough provisions as they could use in the short term (“as were necessary”).
This once again, is exactly as it is supposed to be for the bond-servants, according to the Master, Jesus.
As we covered earlier, tithing to someone as a means of honoring them with a financial reward was a practice of the ancient pagan cultures. Pro-tithers take a decidedly poignant Christian situation described in Acts 28, and interpret it in worldly terms of a pagan culture when they read this monetary reward into the act of honoring those who are in service to Christ.
If “honor” really meant payment of money as pro-tithers claim, it would have been word #591, just as it is in any other place in the New Testament where it is referring to material wealth, or an Earthly reward of some type.
1Peter 5:3 says to teach and minister to others “willingly, readily, without payment of money, without assuming authority over them, but leading by example.”
How can this scripture be true if, as the tithe promoters assert, Paul was in effect telling Timothy to hold out for double pay (double honor), (plus “first fruit tithes”, plus offerings, according to some) as part of his contract negotiations? Who is wrong here – Peter and Paul, or the money-coveting preachers?
Once again we see that the pro-tithe preachers take a perfectly innocent, honest statement of scripture – in this case 1Timothy 5:17-18 about respect and brotherly love – and do it violence; twisting and perverting it to give it a monetary, commercially marketable application; making fantastic statements about plain words in Scripture and in the process denying that other scriptures like 1Timothy 6:8 and 1Peter 5:3 mean what they say.