COMMENTARY BY JOHN W. GREGSON

THE APOSTLES AND THEIR RIGHTS

I Corinthians 9:1 - 27

Further proof of his calling and dedication to the call were the Corinthians themselves; the proof or seal of Paul's apostleship was in his work for the Lord. He had preached to them (Acts 18:1 - 11), and established a strong church in their midst. A seal is a mark stamped on clay, wax or similar substance and was first of all a mark of ownership, and then a means of authentication (Morris p. 132). The Corinthians must have been evaluating the merits and demerits of Paul's conduct and trying him like judges (4:3). Some were saved; that is some proof of his calling and ministry. Paul was an apostle to them if no one else. The Corinthians were a seal (sphragis) or mark of ownership that Paul was divinely called to his apostleship. "The evidence for (Paul's) divine appointment was probably more abundant in Corinth than in any other place. The Corinthians themselves were his proof" (Yeager, p. 518).

If anyone wants to question Paul about his apostleship, his answer (apologia) is let those investigating (anakrino) or examining his activity look at the souls saved and the strong church in the city of Corinth. The original Twelve (really twelve minus Judas Iscariot) and the Apostle Paul make up the apostolic group. Technically speaking the word apostle means "sent one," but the eleven plus Paul are the only boni fide Apostles. To these apostles God gave certain gifts (miracles, prophesying, special knowledge, raising the dead, etc.) that were given to no one else, and after the New Testament canon was completed those apostolic gifts were fulfilled. "The critics in Corinth were 'investigating' Paul with sharp eyes to find faults. How often the pastor is under the critic's spy-glass" (Robertson, p. 142).

4 - 6 Paul makes a statement about his claim as an apostle; it can be supported by the church. Some in Corinth must have been questioning Paul's power or right to eat and drink as opposed to asceticism. He means the right to eat and drink at the expense of the church, to be supported by the church without working at manual labor. The Greeks detested all manual labor. In verse 4 Paul defends his right to accept at least enough financial remuneration for his ministry to pay for his food and drink.

In fact, Paul states that the apostles possessed the right to have a family (to lead (periagein) or escort about a wife who is a sister in the Lord; we know that Cephas was married (Matthew 8:14; Mark 1:30; Luke 4:38). Paul probably refers to his missionary journeys, in which he claims the right to have a wife to accompany him. Although Paul may have been a bachelor or a widower, the workers for the Lord were not forbidden to marry and have a family.

Furthermore, Paul questioned the Corinthians if he did not have the power or authority to forbid him taking a secular job to help pay for the expenses as he and Barnabas preached and traveled in the work of the Lord. Did they not have the privilege of quitting their secular jobs and serve the Lord full time? Although Paul did make tents and work in the leather business to pay for his expenses. Paul told the brethren at Ephesus, "Yea, ye yourselves know that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me" (Acts 20:34). Remember that Barnabas was a companion of Paul on his first missionary journey. The name given to Barnabas was given by the apostles; his original name was Joseph (Acts 4:36). It must be remembered that Jesus said to the twelve whom He sent out to preach to the Jewish nation, "Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor copper (coins) in your purses, nor a bag for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet a staff; for the workman is worthy of his food" Matthew 10:9, 10, and see also Luke 10:4 - 9). 7 - 12 Paul questions the Corinthians further using several parallels to prove the minister is worth his hire. First, a soldier does not go to war at his own expense. His government pays him provisions and a meager wage (opsonois) from which he can purchase his necessities and incidentals. The planter of a vineyard eats the fruit therefrom. The shepherd is permitted to use the milk from his flock. "According to the eastern custom still preserved, a share of the milk was part of the shepherd's pay. By these analogies the apostle establishes his position, that men are not accustomed to work without pay" (Gould, p. 76). "Paul is defending the right of a preacher to derive a living wage from his ministry. He presses the point through verse 15" (Yeager, p. 523).

Paul is not writing these things from the human standpoint; there is a scriptural basis. He proceeds to quote Deuteronomy 25:4 which reads, "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the grain." The ancient method of threshing grain was to drive the oxen as they pulled a sled-like contraption (sledge or drag) over the harvested grain spread out on the threshing floor. If God is concerned with the feeding of the oxen that treads out the grain, is he less interested in the preacher receiving money for his labor? "(God) causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herb for the service of man...The young lions roar after their prey, and seek their food from God" (Psalm 104:14, 21), and again "(God) giveth to the beast his food, and to the young ravens which cry" (Psalm 147:9). Yeager says on page 527, "If an ox is fed a part of the grain which he threshes, should not a preacher expect to get paid?" Paul uses the same Old Testament Scripture in his instructions to Timothy (I Timothy 5:18) adding that "the laborer is worthy of his hire."

In verse 10 Paul against asks a question, "Or saith he it (the reference to the oxen that treadeth out the grain) altogether for our sakes?" Then he answers his own question, "For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope: and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker (metechein) or co-partner of his hope." The workers as they do their work do so in hopes of gaining some rewards for their labor. Then Paul reasons, "If we (probably Paul, Silas and Timothy and maybe Apollos) have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?" He contrasts spiritual (pneumatika) truths with carnal (sarkika) or material things (Galatians 6:6). Paul shares spiritual truths or benefits with the Corinthians, shouldn't they share with him their financial resources? "The assurance of salvation from sin is a far greater gift to a lost sinner than any size check in a love offering. Not that Paul gave them their salvation. That could only come from God, but Paul was the messenger whom God used to bring them the good news" (Yeager, p. 528).

Then Paul writes of others who are partakers of this power over the Corinthians. Doubtless others who preached the gospel to them received an offering for their labors, just who those were is not known. It could have been Apollos or maybe a pastor or some other preacher; Paul condones their assistance to other ministers. "Paul grants that the Corinthians are right if they expect their teachers to do what their philosophers did, namely to receive an honorarium for their instruction. But he points out that for the sake of the gospel he did not make use of his right and refrained from asking any payment" (Grosheide, p. 206). He did not, however, burden the Corinthians for his financial support. He worked with his hands although he had reason to expect some support from them. He endured (stegomen) or bore the responsibility of finances in order that the gospel would not be hindered (egkopen). "The word hindered or hindrance denotes something cut down across the road of an army to hinder its march" (Gould, p. 78).

13, 14 Paul's claim to apostleship is proven by various analogies and precedents, showing that the laborer is worthy of his hire. The writer uses another Old Testament Scripture to reinforce the principle of supporting the ministry. "Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things (hiera) or sacred things live of the things of the temple? And they which wait at (paredreuontes) or serve at the altar are partakers (summerizontai) or share with the altar?" See Numbers 18:8 - 20. So just as the priests under the Mosaic law received some portion of the sacrifices for them and their families, so the minister's or preacher's needs should be supplied by his congregation (14). Jehovah God has ordained (dietazen from tasso = appointed and dia = through) or set in order that those who preach the gospel should live by the gospel. "As it was in the Levitical tabernacle or temple so it shall be also in the Christian churches" (Yeager, p. 533).

15 - 17 Evidently Paul did not want to be a burden to the churches he served, lest someone accuse him to taking advantage of the churches he would rather die than for someone make a false accusation against him. Paul deserved no glory for his preaching, nor did he desire any. Later on he saw his mistake because churches grow as they experience responsibilities. He felt the call of God, and it weighed so heavily upon him he could not help but preach the gospel. One is reminded that Jeremiah (20:7 - 9) complained to God; he was being persecuted, no one would hear his message, and he said, "I will not make mention of (God) nor speak any more in his name. But his word was in mine heart like a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing and I count not refrain." Paul or any other person called by God can resist, but the one called of God to preach or teach is miserable if he does not preach or teach. If a person thinks he is called of God and can do anything else but preach and be happy, it is a pretty good sign he was not called of God in the first place. Anyone who has received the divine call cannot but to preach and teach in Jesus' name. Paul wrote, "Woe (ouai) or alas, is me if I do not preach the gospel." He felt a great and holy compulsion; "woe" can mean the punishment of Jehovah God. If Paul preached willingly and joyfully he would have a reward, but if he failed to preach he would be miserable. Some translations use the idea here of preaching with or without constraint; voluntarily and involuntary. On the subject of the Professional Minister: Guthrie writes, "The man who has adopted the Church as a profession, as other men adopt the law, the army, or the navy, and goes through the routine of its duties with the coldness of a mere official-filled by him, the pulpit seems filled by the ghastly form of a skeleton that, in its cold and bony fingers, holds a burning lamp" (B. I. XLVII, p. 544).

18 - 22 Paul felt the divine call to preach so distinctly and the burden was so heavy, he would preach if there were no remuneration whatsoever; he would preach the gospel free of charge (adapanon) or without charge. Paul preached as a servant of Christ and a servant (edoulosa) or slave of the churches that souls would be saved and born into God's kingdom; he was indebted to every man, woman, boy and girl to share the message of God. The thought here is "What possible reward is there, then, for my preaching the gospel, since my work is that of a slave? There is none, in order that I may go on and do something not required of me, and by this unconstrained work, obtain a reward" (Gould, p. 80).

To the Jews Paul became as a Jew that he might gain (kerdeso) or win the Jews, to those under the law, as under the law; he knew the Jewish scruples, and he could conform to Jewish customs and use methods of teaching adapted to them (Acts 16:3, 21). "(Paul) was emancipated from the law as a means of salvation, yet he knew how to speak to them because of his former beliefs and life with them (Galatians 4:21) (Robertson, p. 147). To those without the Jewish law (Gentiles) he spoke to them through the law of Christ. He did this in order to gain all the people he could; he was aware of the Gentile freedom. What he means here is that he spoke to everyone on their level. He understood every circumstance, and he was able to capitalize upon it. To be weak means that Paul respected their scruples and became weak with them or he could have referred to the weak in conscience or possibly the economically weak. He made himself to be all things that he might win or gain men in every strata of culture. "Paul would do everything legitimate in order to win the lost" (Yeager, p. 540). Paul uses a play on the word all, "All things (panta) to all men (tois pasin, the whole number) by all means (pantos)."

23 - 25 All of these things Paul did for the sake of the gospel that he might be a partaker (sygkoinonos) or sharer of the fruits of the Corinthians. Goodspeed translates a part of this verse thus, "...so that I may share in its blessings along with the rest." Here Paul resorts to a familiar analogy of the runner on the race-course. He asks the question, "Know ye not that they who run in a (foot) race run all, but one receiveth the prize?" The Corinthians were acquainted with the analogy - they know all about the training for the races (stadio) from which we get our English word stadium. The human races were run on the Roman oval foot track, like the one at Olympia and in the Isthmian games in Corinth. Only one person could win, but everyone trained as though he would be the winner. In the Christian life all faithful runners can win (katalambano) or capture the prize (brabeion) or award. Those who are faithful and put their whole body, soul and spirit into the race can be a winner. The runner, however, must abide by the rules, and he must be temperate in all things; he must strive for the mastery of his body; he refrains from all kinds of dissipation and indulgence. There is a corruptible (phtharton) or perishable crown forthcoming to the winner; in the Christian race there is an incorruptible (aphthartou) or imperishable crown. Earthly runners struggle for a wreath that withers after a short time. "The Christian has before him a much more worthwhile crown, namely an incorruptible one (cf. II Timothy 4:8). The strenuous self-denial of the athlete in training for his fleeting reward is a rebuke to all half-hearted, flabby Christian service. Notice that the athlete denies himself many lawful pleasures. The Christian must avoid not only definite sin, but anything that hinders his complete effectiveness" (Morris, p. 139). The crown, however, belongs only to those who agonize (agonizomenos) or strive/struggle just like the amateur wrestler grunts and groans to overcome his opponent.

26, 27 Paul restates his own conflict with evil in himself, lest he, who has held up the reward before others, himself lose the prize. The writer says, "I therefore so run, not as uncertainly (adelos) or aimlessly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air. But I keep under my body and bring it into subjection (buffet it); lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." Now Paul uses the analogy of a fighter or boxer (a pugilist); he does not "shadowbox" with an imaginary opponent. He literally "keeps on hitting himself under the eye," beating himself black and blue; he administers self-punishment. He subjects (doulagogo) or subdues his flesh and brings it under his control. He does not want to be a castaway (adokimos) or a useless vessel. This is vividly illustrated by, "The housewife in Pompeii who wrote adikomos on a teacup which, though cracked and useless, was nevertheless placed upon a cupboard shelf and treasured for sentimental reasons, expresses Paul's meaning" of castaway - a cracked teapot (Yeager, p. 550).

Return to Home Page for John W. Gregson