Text -- 1 Corinthians 9:1-15 (NET)

The Rights of an Apostle

9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 9:2 If I am not an apostle to others, at least I am to you, for you are the confirming sign of my apostleship in the Lord. 9:3 This is my defense to those who examine me. 9:4 Do we not have the right to financial support? 9:5 Do we not have the right to the company of a believing wife, like the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? 9:6 Or do only Barnabas and I lack the right not to work? 9:7 Who ever serves in the army at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its fruit? Who tends a flock and does not consume its milk? 9:8 Am I saying these things only on the basis of common sense, or does the law not say this as well? 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain.” God is not concerned here about oxen, is he? 9:10 Or is he not surely speaking for our benefit? It was written for us, because the one plowing and threshing ought to work in hope of enjoying the harvest. 9:11 If we sowed spiritual blessings among you, is it too much to reap material things from you? 9:12 If others receive this right from you, are we not more deserving? But we have not made use of this right. Instead we endure everything so that we may not be a hindrance to the gospel of Christ. 9:13 Don’t you know that those who serve in the temple eat food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar receive a part of the offerings? 9:14 In the same way the Lord commanded those who proclaim the gospel to receive their living by the gospel. 9:15 But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing these things so that something will be done for me. In fact, it would be better for me to die than– no one will deprive me of my reason for boasting!

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 1Co 9:1

Am I not free? ( Ouk eimi eleutheros̱ ).

Free as a Christian from Mosaic ceremonialism (cf. 1Co 9:19) as much as any Christian and yet he adapts his moral independence to the principle of considerate love in 1Co 8:13.

Robertson: 1Co 9:1

Am I not an apostle? ( ouk eimi apostolos̱ ).

He has the exceptional privileges as an apostle to support from the churches and yet he foregoes these.

Robertson: 1Co 9:1

Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? ( ouchi Iēsoun ton Kurion hēmōn heoraka̱ ).

Proof (1Co 15:8; Act 9:17, Act 9:27; Act 18:9; Act 22:14, Act 22:17.; 2Co 12:1.) that he has the qualification of an apostle (Act 1:22) though not one of the twelve. Note strong form of the negative ouchi here. All these questions expect an affirmative answer. The perfect active heoraka from horaō , to see, does not here have double reduplication as in Joh 1:18.

Robertson: 1Co 9:1

Are not ye? ( ou humeis este̱ ).

They were themselves proof of his apostleship.

Robertson: 1Co 9:2

Yet at least I am to you ( alla ge humin eimi ).

An argumentum ad hominem and a pointed appeal for their support. Note use of alla ge in the apodosis (cf. 1Co 8:6).

Robertson: 1Co 9:3

My defence ( hē emē apologia ).

Original sense, not idea of apologizing as we say. See note on Act 22:1; note on Act 25:16. Refers to what precedes and to what follows as illustration of 1Co 8:13.

Robertson: 1Co 9:3

To them that examine me ( tois eme anakrinousin ).

See note on 1Co 2:15; note on 1Co 4:3. 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: 1Co 9:4

Have we no right? ( Mē ouk echomen exousiaṉ ).

Literary plural here though singular in 1Co 9:1. The mē in this double negative expects the answer "No"while ouk goes with the verb echomen . "Do we fail to have the right?"Cf. Rom 10:18. (Robertson, Grammar , p. 1173).

Robertson: 1Co 9:5

Have we no right? ( Mē ouk echomen exousiaṉ ).

Same idiom.

Robertson: 1Co 9:5

To lead about a wife that is a believer? ( adelphēn gunaika periageiṉ ).

Old verb periagō , intransitive in Act 13:11. Two substantives in apposition, a sister a wife, a common Greek idiom. This is a plea for the support of the preacher’ s wife and children. Plainly Paul has no wife at this time.

Robertson: 1Co 9:5

And Cephas ( kai Kēphās ).

Why is he singled out by name? Perhaps because of his prominence and because of the use of his name in the divisions in Corinth (1Co 1:12). It was well known that Peter was married (Mat 8:14). Paul mentions James by name in Gal 1:19 as one of the Lord’ s brothers. All the other apostles were either married or had the right to be.

Robertson: 1Co 9:6

Have we not a right to forbear working? ( ouk echomen exousian mē ergazesthai̱ ).

By ē (or) Paul puts the other side about Barnabas (the only allusion since the dispute in Act 15:39, but in good spirit) and himself. Perhaps (Hofmann) Paul has in mind the fact that in the first great mission tour (Acts 13; 14), Barnabas and Paul received no help from the church in Antioch, but were left to work their way along at their own charges. It was not till the Philippian Church took hold that Paul had financial aid (Phi 4:15). Here both negatives have their full force. Literally, Do we not have (ouk echomen , expecting the affirmative reply) the right not (mē , negative of the infinitive ergazesthai ) to do manual labour (usual meaning of ergazomai as in 1Co 4:12)?"There was no more compulsion on Paul and Barnabas to support themselves than upon the other workers for Christ. They renounced no rights in being voluntarily independent.

Robertson: 1Co 9:7

What soldier ever serveth? ( tis strateuetai pote̱ ).

"Who ever serves as a soldier?"serves in an army (stratos ). Present middle of old verb strateuō .

Robertson: 1Co 9:7

At his own charges ( idiois opsōniois ).

This late word opsōnion (from opson , cooked meat or relish with bread, and ōneomai , to buy) found in Menander, Polybius, and very common in papyri and inscriptions in the sense of rations or food, then for the soldiers’ wages (often provisions) or the pay of any workman. So of the wages of sin (Rom 6:23). Paul uses labōn opsōnion (receiving wages, the regular idiom) in 2Co 11:8. See Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary ; Deissmann, Bible Studies , pp. 148, 266; Light from the Ancient East , p. 168. To give proof of his right to receive pay for preaching Paul uses the illustrations of the soldier (1Co 9:7), the husbandman (1Co 9:7), the shepherd (1Co 9:7), the ox treading out the grain (1Co 9:8), the ploughman (1Co 9:10), the priests in the temple (1Co 9:13), proof enough in all conscience, and yet not enough for some churches who even today starve their pastors in the name of piety.

Robertson: 1Co 9:7

Who planteth a vineyard? ( tis phuteuei ampelōna̱ ).

Ampelōn no earlier than Diodorus, but in lxx and in papyri. Place of vines (ampelos ), meaning of ending ̇ōn .

Robertson: 1Co 9:7

Who feedeth a flock? ( tis poimainei poimnēṉ ).

Cognate accusative, both old words. Paul likens the pastor to a soldier, vinedresser, shepherd. He contends with the world, he plants churches, he exercises a shepherd’ s care over them (Vincent).

Robertson: 1Co 9:8

Do I speak these things after the manner of men? ( Mē kata anthrōpon tauta lalō̱ ).

Negative answer expected. Paul uses kata anthrōpon six times (1Co 3:3; 1Co 9:8; 1Co 15:32; Gal 1:11; Gal 3:15; Rom 3:5). The illustrations from human life are pertinent, but he has some of a higher order, from Scripture.

Robertson: 1Co 9:8

The law also ( kai ho nomos ).

Perhaps objection was made that the Scripture does not support the practice of paying preachers. That objection is still made by the stingy.

Robertson: 1Co 9:9

Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn ( ou phimōseis boun aloōnta ).

Quotation from Deu 25:4. Prohibition by ou and the volitive future indicative. Phimoō , to muzzle (from phimos , a muzzle for dogs and oxen), appears first in Aristophanes ( Clouds , 592) and not again till lxx and N.T., though in the papyri also. Evidently a vernacular word, perhaps a slang word. See metaphorical use in Mat 22:12, Mat 22:34. Aloōnta is present active participle of the old verb aloaō , occurs in the N.T. only here (and 1Co 9:10) and 1Ti 5:18 where it is also quoted. It is probably derived from halos or halon , a threshing-floor, or the disc of a shield or of the sun and moon. The Egyptians according to the monuments, used oxen to thresh out the grain, sometimes donkeys, by pulling a drag over the grain. The same process may be found today in Andalusia, Italy, Palestine. A hieroglyphic inscription at Eileithyas reads:

Robertson: 1Co 9:9

"Thresh ye yourselves, O oxen, Measures of grain for yourselves, Measures of grain for your masters." @@Note mē melei expects the negative answer, impersonal verb with dative and genitive cases (theoi , God, boōn , oxen). @@Altogether ( pantōs ).

But here probably with the notion of doubtless or assuredly. The editors differ in the verse divisions here. The Canterbury Version puts both these questions in 1Co 9:10, the American Standard the first in 1Co 9:9, the second in 1Co 9:10.

Robertson: 1Co 9:10

He that plougheth ( ho arotriōn ).

Late verb arotriaō , to plough, for the old aroō from arotron (plough), in lxx and rare in papyri.

Robertson: 1Co 9:10

In hope of partaking ( ep' elpidi tou metechein ).

The infinitive aloāin is not repeated nor is opheilei though it is understood, "He that thresheth ought to thresh in hope of partaking."He that ploughs hardly refers to the ox at the plough as he that threshes does. The point is that all the workers (beast or man) share in the fruit of the toil.

Robertson: 1Co 9:11

Is it a great matter? ( mega̱ ).

The copula estin has to be supplied. Note two conditions of first class with ei , both assumed to be true. On pneumatika and sarkika see note on 1Co 2:14 note on 1Co 3:3. This point comes out sharply also in Gal 6:6.

Robertson: 1Co 9:12

Over you ( humōn ).

Objective genitive after exousian .

Robertson: 1Co 9:12

Do not we yet more? ( ou mallon hēmeis̱ ).

Because of Paul’ s peculiar relation to that church as founder and apostle.

Robertson: 1Co 9:12

But we bear all things ( alla panta stegomen ).

Old verb to cover (stegē , roof) and so to cover up, to conceal, to endure (1Co 13:7 of love). Paul deliberately declined to use (usual instrumental case with chraomai ) his right to pay in Corinth.

Robertson: 1Co 9:12

That we may cause no hindrance ( hina mē tina enkopēn dōmen ).

Late word enkopē , a cutting in (cf. radio or telephone) or hindrance from enkoptō , to cut in, rare word (like ekkopē ) here only in N.T. and once in Vettius Valens. How considerate Paul is to avoid "a hindrance to the gospel of Christ"(tōi euaggeliōi tou Christou , dative case and genitive) rather than insist on his personal rights and liberties, an eloquent example for all modern men.

Robertson: 1Co 9:13

Sacred things ( ta hiera ).

Robertson: 1Co 9:13

Of the temple ( tou hierou ).

Play on the same word hierou (sacred). See Num 18:8-20 for the details. This is a very pertinent illustration.

Robertson: 1Co 9:13

They which wait upon the altar ( hoi tōi thusiastēriōi paredreuontes ).

Old word paredreuō , to sit beside, from paṙ̇edros , like Latin assidere , and so constant attendance. Only here in the N.T. Locative case thusiastēriōi , late word found so far only in lxx, Philo, Josephus, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers. See Mat 5:23.

Robertson: 1Co 9:14

Even so did the Lord ordain ( houtōs kai ho Kurios dietaxen ).

Just as God gave orders about the priests in the temple, so did the Lord Jesus give orders for those who preach the gospel to live out of the gospel (ek tou euaggeliou zēin ). Evidently Paul was familiar with the words of Jesus in Mat 10:10; Luk 10:7. either in oral or written form. He has made his argument for the minister’ s salary complete for all time.

Robertson: 1Co 9:15

For it were good for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void ( kalon gar moi mallon apothanein ē to kauchēma mou oudeis kenōsei ).

The tangled syntax of this sentence reflects the intensity of Paul’ s feeling on the subject. He repeats his refusal to use his privileges and rights to a salary by use of the present perfect middle indicative (kechrēmai ). By the epistolary aorist (egrapsa ) he explains that he is not now hinting for a change on their part towards him in the matter, "in my case"(en emoi ). Then he gives his reason in vigorous language without a copula (ēn , were): "For good for me to die rather than,"but here he changes the construction by a violent anacoluthon. Instead of another infinitive (kenōsai ) after ē (than) he changes to the future indicative without hoti or hina , "No one shall make my glorying void,"viz., his independence of help from them. Kenoō is an old verb, from kenos , empty, only in Paul in N.T. See note on 1Co 1:17.

Vincent: 1Co 9:1

Seen Jesus

See 1Co 15:8; Act 9:17; Act 18:9; Act 22:17, Act 22:18; 2Co 12:1 sqq. Compare Act 22:14.

Vincent: 1Co 9:2

Seal ( σφραγίς )

See on Rom 4:11; see on Joh 3:33; see on Rev 22:10.

Vincent: 1Co 9:3

Answer ( ἀπολογία )

See on 1Pe 3:15.

Vincent: 1Co 9:3

Examine ( ἀνακρίνουσιν )

See on Luk 23:14.

Vincent: 1Co 9:4

Eat - drink

At the expense of the churches. Compare Luk 10:7.

Vincent: 1Co 9:5

A sister, a wife

Wrong. Sister means a christian woman , a fellow-member of the Church, as Rom 16:1; 1Co 7:15; Jam 2:15. It is in apposition with wife : A wife that is a sister or believer . So Rev. Such an one has also the right, like her husband, to be maintained by the Church. Some of the fathers claimed that not a wife was meant, but a female attendant, serviens mantrona , who contributed to the maintenance of the apostles as certain women ministered to Christ. There is no foundation for this. It is contradicted by the example of Peter cited at the end of this verse; compare Mat 8:14; and besides, the point of the argument is that these companions should be maintained. Such a practice, however, did grow up in the Church, but was abolished by the Council of Nicaea on account of its abuses. Stanley remarks that the fact of these women accompanying their husbands, may be explained by the necessity of females to gain access to and to baptize the female converts in Greece and in oriental countries; the same necessity which gave rise to the order of deaconesses.

Vincent: 1Co 9:6

Barnabas

The only mention of Barnabas along with Paul since the quarrel, Act 15:39.

Vincent: 1Co 9:6

Forbear working

For their own support. Ἑργάζεσθαι to work , is the regular word for manual labor. See Mat 21:28; Act 18:3. See on 3Jo 1:5; and see on trade , Rev 18:17.

Vincent: 1Co 9:7

Goeth a warfare ( στρατεύεται )

The " a" in a warfare is the abbreviated preposition on or in , as a coming , afield , going a pilgrimage . In the Geneva Bible, Deu 24:5 is rendered, " When a man taketh a newe wife, he shal not go a warfare ." So Froissart: " He was not in good poynt to ride a warfare ." The phrase, however, is incorrect as a translation, since the Greek word is used not only of war, but of military service in general. Soldiers are called στρατευόμενοι , Luk 3:14. More correctly, who serveth as a soldier? or, as Rev., what soldier serveth? See on Luk 3:14; see on Jam 4:1.

Vincent: 1Co 9:7

Charges ( ὀψωνίοις )

See on Luk 3:14, and compare Rom 6:23; 2Co 11:8.

Vincent: 1Co 9:7

Feedeth ( ποιμαίνει )

See on 1Pe 5:2. Bengel remarks: " The minister of the gospel is beautifully compared with the soldier, vine-dresser, shepherd." He goes forth to contend with the world, to plant churches, and to exercise pastoral care over them.

Vincent: 1Co 9:8

As a man ( κατὰ ἄνθρωπον )

Rev., after the manner of men . See on Rom 3:5. The formula occurs six times in Paul's epistles. The question introduces another kind of evidence - that from Scripture. I will not confine myself to illustrations from human affairs. I will appeal to Scripture.

Vincent: 1Co 9:9

Muzzle ( φιμώσεις )

See on Mat 22:12, Mat 22:34; see on Mar 4:39. Some texts read κημώσεις a muzzle , from κημός a muzzle See Deu 25:4.

Vincent: 1Co 9:9

Ox - treadeth

The custom of driving the oxen over the corn strewed on the ground or on a paved area, was an Egyptian one. In later times the Jews used threshing instruments, dragged by the beasts through the grain Herodotus says that pigs were employed for this purpose in Egypt, but the monuments always represent oxen, or, more rarely, asses. In Andalusia the process may still be seen, the animals pulling the drag in a circle through the heap of grain; and in Italy, the method of treading out by horses was in use up to a comparatively recent date.

The verb ἀλοάω to tread , occurring only here, Deu 25:10, and 1Ti 5:18, is etymologically related to ἅλων halon, threshing-floor (see on Mat 3:12), which also means the disk of the sun or moon, or a halo , thus implying the circular shape of the floor. Dr. Thomson says: " The command of Moses not to muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn is literally obeyed to this day by most farmers, and you often see the oxen eating from the floor as they go round. There are niggardly peasants, however, who do muzzle the ox" (" The Land and the Book" ). This custom was in strong contrast with that of Gentile farmers, who treated their laboring animals cruelly, sometimes employing inhuman methods to prevent them from eating while threshing. All students of the Egyptian monuments are familiar with the hieroglyphic inscription in a tomb at Eileithyas, one of the oldest written poems extant:

" Thresh ye for yourselves,

Thresh ye for yourselves,

Thresh ye for yourselves, O oxen.

Measures of grain for yourselves,

Measures of grain for your masters."

Vincent: 1Co 9:9

Doth God take care for oxen?

The A.V. misses the true point of the expression. Paul, of course, assumes that God cares for the brute creation; but he means that this precept of Moses was not primarily for the oxen's sake but for man's sake. He is emphasizing the typical and spiritual meaning of the command. Render, as Rev., Is it for the oxen that God careth?

Vincent: 1Co 9:10

Altogether ( πάντως )

Better, as Rev., in margin, as He doubtless doth , or, as American Rev., assuredly .

Vincent: 1Co 9:10

In hope ( ἐπ ' ἐλπίδι )

See on Rom 8:21. Resting on hope. Compare Aeschylus: " When hope has raised me up on strength (ἐπ ' ἀλκᾶς ); i.e. elated me with confidence" (" Choephoroe," 407).

Vincent: 1Co 9:10

He that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope

The text is in error here. The true reading is ὁ ἀλοῶν ἐπ ' ἐλπίδι τοῦ μετέχειν and ; he that thresheth to thresh in hope of partaking .

Vincent: 1Co 9:12

Power ( ἐξουσίας )

Rev., correctly, right . The right to claim maintenance.

Vincent: 1Co 9:12

Suffer ( στέγομεν )

Rev., bear . The primary meaning is to cover . So some render 1Co 13:7, covereth for beareth . Hence to protect by covering, as with a tight ship or roof. So Aesehylus, of a ship: " The wooden house with sails that keeps out (στέγων ) the sea" (" Suppliants," 126). " The tower keeps off (ἀποστέγει ) the multitude of the enemy" (" Seven against Thebes," 220). And so, to bear up against , endure . Compare 1Th 3:1, 1Th 3:5.

Vincent: 1Co 9:12

Hinder ( ἐγκοπὴν δῶμεν )

Lit., give hindrance . Rev., cause hindrance . Ἑγκοπή hindrance , only here in the New Testament. Primarily, an incision , and so used by the physician Galen. Compare the kindred verb ἐγκόπτω to cut into , also occurring in Hippocrates in the surgical sense. In the sense of cutting into one's way, it gets the meaning of hindrance . See Act 24:4; Rom 15:22; Gal 5:7; 1Th 2:18; 1Pe 3:7. Compare the Latin intercidere to divide , inter-rupt .

Vincent: 1Co 9:13

Minister ( ἐργαζόμενοι )

Lit, work or perform . Never in classical Greek of being engaged in sacred rites.

Vincent: 1Co 9:13

Wait ( παρεδρεύοντες )

Etymologically akin to πάρεδρος sitting beside . See on 1Co 7:35. Only here in the New Testament.

Vincent: 1Co 9:13

Altar ( θυσιαστηρίῳ )

See on Act 17:23.

Wesley: 1Co 9:1

That is, Have not I the liberty of a common Christian? yea, that of an apostle? He vindicates his apostleship, 1Co 9:1-3: his apostolical liberty, 1Co 9:4-19.

Wesley: 1Co 9:1

Without this he could not have been one of those first grand witnesses.

Wesley: 1Co 9:1

A full evidence that God hath sent me? And yet some, it seems, objected to his being an apostle, because he had not asserted his privilege in demanding and receiving such maintenance from the churches as was due to that office.

Wesley: 1Co 9:2

Who have received not only faith by my mouth, but all the gifts of the Spirit by my hands.

Wesley: 1Co 9:3

Concerning my apostleship.

Wesley: 1Co 9:3

Which I have now given.

Wesley: 1Co 9:4

I and my fellowlabourers.

Wesley: 1Co 9:4

At the expense of those among whom we labour.

Wesley: 1Co 9:5

And to demand sustenance for her also? As well as the other apostles - Who therefore, it is plain, did this.

Wesley: 1Co 9:5

Hence we learn, That St. Peter continued to live with his wife after he became an apostle: That he had no rights as an apostle which were not common to St. Paul.

Wesley: 1Co 9:6

With our hands.

Wesley: 1Co 9:8

Barely on the authority of human reason? Does not God also say, in effect, the same thing? The ox that treadeth out the corn - This was the custom in Judea, and many eastern nations. In several of them it is retained still. And at this day, horses tread out the corn in some parts of Germany.

Wesley: 1Co 9:9

In this direction.

Wesley: 1Co 9:9

Only? Hath he not a farther meaning? And so undoubtedly he hath in all the other Mosaic laws of this kind.

Wesley: 1Co 9:10

Of reaping. This seems to be a proverbial expression.

Wesley: 1Co 9:10

Ought not to be disappointed, ought to eat the fruit of his labours. And ought they who labour in God's husbandry. Deu 25:4

Wesley: 1Co 9:11

As is needful for our sustenance? Do you give us things of greater value than those you receive from us?

Wesley: 1Co 9:12

Whether true or false apostles.

Wesley: 1Co 9:12

Have a right to be maintained.

Wesley: 1Co 9:12

On account of our having laboured so much more? Lest we should give any hinderance to the gospel - By giving an occasion of cavil or reproach.

Wesley: 1Co 9:14

Mat 10:10

Wesley: 1Co 9:15

To give occasion to them that seek occasion against me, 2Co 11:12.

JFB: 1Co 9:1

The oldest manuscripts read the order thus, "Am I not free? am I not an apostle?" He alludes to 1Co 8:9, "this liberty of yours": If you claim it, I appeal to yourselves as the witnesses, have not I also it? "Am I not free?" If you be so, much more I. For "am I not an apostle?" so that I can claim not only Christian, but also apostolic, liberty.

JFB: 1Co 9:1

Corporeally, not in a mere vision: compare 1Co 15:8, where the fact of the resurrection, which he wishes to prove, could only be established by an actual bodily appearance, such as was vouchsafed to Peter and the other apostles. In Act 9:7, Act 9:17 the contrast between "the men with him seeing no man," and "Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way," shows that Jesus actually appeared to him in going to Damascus. His vision of Christ in the temple (Act 22:17) was "in a trance." To be a witness of Christ's resurrection was a leading function of an apostle (Act 1:22). The best manuscripts omit "Christ."

JFB: 1Co 9:1

Your conversion is His workmanship (Eph 2:10) through my instrumentality: the "seal of mine apostleship" (1Co 9:2).

JFB: 1Co 9:2

Yet at least I am such to you.

JFB: 1Co 9:2

Your conversion by my preaching, accompanied with miracles ("the signs of an apostle," Rom 15:18-19; 2Co 12:12), and your gifts conferred by me (1Co 1:7), vouch for the reality of my apostleship, just as a seal set to a document attests its genuineness (Joh 3:33; Rom 4:11).

JFB: 1Co 9:3

That is, who call in question mine apostleship.

JFB: 1Co 9:3

Namely, that you are the seal of mine apostleship.

JFB: 1Co 9:4

Greek, "right," or lawful power, equivalent to "liberty" claimed by the Corinthians (1Co 8:9). The "we" includes with himself his colleagues in the apostleship. The Greek interrogative expresses, "You surely won't say (will you?) that we have not the power or right," &c.

JFB: 1Co 9:4

Without laboring with our hands (1Co 9:11, 1Co 9:13-14). Paul's not exercising this right was made a plea by his opponents for insinuating that he was himself conscious he was no true apostle (2Co 12:13-16).

JFB: 1Co 9:5

That is, "a sister as a wife"; "a sister" by faith, which makes all believers brethren and sisters in the one family of God: "a wife" by marriage covenant. Paul implies he did not exercise his undoubted right to marry and "lead about" a believer, for the sake of Christian expediency, as well to save the Church the expense of maintaining her in his wide circuits, as also that he might give himself more undistractedly to building up the Church of Christ (1Co 7:26, 1Co 7:32, 1Co 7:35). Contrast the Corinthians' want of self-sacrifice in the exercise of their "liberty" at the cost of destroying, instead of edifying, the Church (1Co 8:9, Margin; 1Co 8:10-13).

JFB: 1Co 9:5

Implying that some of them had availed themselves of the power which they all had, of marrying. We know from Mat 8:14, that Cephas (Peter) was a married man. A confutation of Peter's self-styled followers, the Romanists, who exclude the clergy from marriage. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA [Miscellanies, 7.63] records a tradition that he encouraged his wife when being led to death by saying, "Remember, my dear one, the Lord." Compare EUSEBIUS [Eccleiastical History, 3.30].

JFB: 1Co 9:5

Held in especial esteem on account of their relationship to Jesus (Act 1:14; Gal 1:9). James, Joses, Simon, and Judas. Probably cousins of Jesus: as cousins were termed by the Jews "brethren." ALFORD makes them literally brothers of Jesus by Joseph and Mary.

JFB: 1Co 9:5

Probably singled out as being a name carrying weight with one partisan section at Corinth. "If your favorite leader does so, surely so may I" (1Co 1:12; 1Co 3:22).

JFB: 1Co 9:6

Long the associate of Paul, and, like him, in the habit of self-denyingly forbearing to claim the maintenance which is a minister's right. So Paul supported himself by tent-making (Act 18:3; Act 20:34; 1Th 2:9; 2Th 3:8).

JFB: 1Co 9:7

The minister is spiritually a soldier (2Ti 2:3), a vine-dresser (1Co 3:6-8; Son 1:6), and a shepherd (1Pe 5:2, 1Pe 5:4).

JFB: 1Co 9:7

The oldest manuscripts omit "of."

JFB: 1Co 9:8

I speak thus not merely according to human judgment, but with the sanction of the divine law also.

JFB: 1Co 9:9

(Deu 25:4). In the East to the present day they do not after reaping carry the sheaves home to barns as we do, but take them to an area under the open air to be threshed by the oxen treading them with their feet, or else drawing a threshing instrument over them (compare Mic 4:13).

JFB: 1Co 9:9

Rather, "Is it for the oxen that God careth?" Is the animal the ultimate object for whose sake this law was given? No. God does care for the lower animal (Psa 36:6; Mat 10:29), but it is with the ultimate aim of the welfare of man, the head of animal creation. In the humane consideration shown for the lower animal, we are to learn that still more ought it to be exercised in the case of man, the ultimate object of the law; and that the human (spiritual as well as temporal) laborer is worthy of his hire.

JFB: 1Co 9:10

Join this with "saith." "Does he (the divine lawgiver) by all means say it for our sakes?" It would be untrue, that God saith it altogether (in the sense of solely) for our sakes. But it is true, that He by all means saith it for our sakes as the ultimate object in the lower world. GROTIUS, however, translates, "mainly" or "especially," instead of altogether.

JFB: 1Co 9:10

"meaning that" [ALFORD]; literally, "because."

JFB: 1Co 9:10

Ought to plough in hope. The obligation rests with the people not to let their minister labor without remuneration.

JFB: 1Co 9:10

The oldest manuscript versions and Fathers read, "He that thresheth (should or ought to thresh) in the hope of partaking" (namely, of the fruit of his threshing). "He that plougheth," spiritually, is the first planter of a church in a place (compare 1Co 3:6, 1Co 3:9); "he that thresheth," the minister who tends a church already planted.

JFB: 1Co 9:11

Emphatical in the Greek. WE, the same persons who have sown to you the infinitely more precious treasures of the Spirit, may at least claim in return what is the only thing you have to give, namely, the goods that nourish the flesh ("your carnal things").

JFB: 1Co 9:12

Whether true apostles (1Co 9:5) or false ones (2Co 11:20).

JFB: 1Co 9:12

Considering our greater labors for you (2Co 11:23).

JFB: 1Co 9:12

Without complaining of it. We desire to conceal (literally, "hold as a water-tight vessel") any distress we suffer from straitened circumstances. The same Greek is in 1Co 13:7.

JFB: 1Co 9:12

Not to cause a hindrance to its progress by giving a handle for the imputation of self-seeking, if we received support from our flock. The less of incumbrance and expense caused to the Church, and the more of work done, the better for the cause of the Gospel (2Ti 2:4).

JFB: 1Co 9:13

The Jewish priests and Levites. The Greek especially applies to the former, the priests offering sacrifices.

JFB: 1Co 9:13

A part of the victims going to the service of the altar, and the rest being shared by the priests (Lev 7:6; Num 18:6, &c.; Deu 18:1, &c.).

JFB: 1Co 9:14

The only inference to be drawn from this passage is, not that the Christian ministry is of a sacrificial character as the Jewish priesthood, but simply, that as the latter was supported by the contributions of the people, so should the former. The stipends of the clergy were at first from voluntary offerings at the Lord's Supper. At the love-feast preceding it every believer, according to his ability, offered a gift; and when the expense of the table had been defrayed, the bishop laid aside a portion for himself, the presbyters, and deacons; and with the rest relieved widows, orphans, confessors, and the poor generally [TERTULLIAN, Apology, 39]. The stipend was in proportion to the dignity and merits of the several bishops, presbyters, and deacons [CYPRIAN, c. 4, ep. 6].

JFB: 1Co 9:14

Plainly marked as the duty of the Christian minister, in contrast to the ministering about sacrifices (Greek) and waiting at the altar of the Jewish priesthood and Levites (1Co 9:13). If the Lord's Supper were a sacrifice (as the Mass is supposed to be), this fourteenth verse would certainly have been worded so, to answer to 1Co 9:13. Note the same Lord Christ "ordains" the ordinances in the Old and in the New Testaments (Mat 10:10; Luk 10:7).

JFB: 1Co 9:15

Paul's special gift of continency, which enabled him to abstain from marriage, and his ability to maintain himself without interrupting seriously his ministry, made that expedient to him which is ordinarily inexpedient; namely, that the ministry should not be supported by the people. What to him was a duty, would be the opposite to one, for instance, to whom God had committed a family, without other means of support.

JFB: 1Co 9:15

None of these "powers" or rights which I might have used (1Co 9:4-6, 1Co 9:12).

JFB: 1Co 9:15

Rather, "Yet I have not written."

JFB: 1Co 9:15

Literally, "in my case": as is done in the case of a soldier, a planter, a shepherd, a ploughman, and a sacrificing priest (1Co 9:7, 1Co 9:10, 1Co 9:13).

JFB: 1Co 9:15

Deprive me of my privilege of preaching the Gospel without remuneration (2Co 11:7-10). Rather than hinder the progress of the Gospel by giving any pretext for a charge of interested motives (2Co 12:17-18), Paul would "die" of hunger. Compare Abraham's similar disinterestedness (Gen 14:22-23).

Clarke: 1Co 9:1

Am I not an apostle? - It is sufficiently evident that there were persons at Corinth who questioned the apostleship of St. Paul; and he was obliged to walk very circumspectly that they might not find any occasion against him. It appears also that he had given them all his apostolical labors gratis; and even this, which was the highest proof of his disinterested benevolence, was produced by his opposers as an argument against him. "Prophets, and all divinely commissioned men, have a right to their secular support; you take nothing: - is not this from a conviction that you have no apostolical right?"On this point the apostle immediately enters on his own defense

Clarke: 1Co 9:1

Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? - These questions are all designed as assertions of the affirmative: I am an apostle; and I am free - possessed of all the rights and privileges of an apostle

Clarke: 1Co 9:1

Have I not seen Jesus Christ - From whom in his personal appearance to me, I have received my apostolic commission. This was judged essentially necessary to constitute an apostle. See Act 22:14, Act 22:15; Act 26:16

Clarke: 1Co 9:1

Are not ye my work - Your conversion from heathenism is the proof that I have preached with the Divine unction and authority

Several good MSS. and versions transpose the two first questions in this verse, thus: Am I not free? am I not an apostle? But I cannot see that either perspicuity or sense gains any thing by this arrangement. On the contrary, it appears to me that his being an apostle gave him the freedom or rights to which he refers, and therefore the common arrangement I judge to be the best.

Clarke: 1Co 9:2

If I be not an apostle unto others - If there be other Churches which have been founded by other apostles; yet it is not so with you

Clarke: 1Co 9:2

The seal of mine apostleship are ye - Your conversion to Christianity is God’ s seal to my apostleship. Had not God sent me, I could not have profited your souls

The σφραγις or seal, was a figure cut in a stone, and that set in a ring, by which letters of credence and authority were stamped. The ancients, particularly the Greeks, excelled in this kind of engraving. The cabinets of the curious give ample proof of this; and the moderns contend in vain to rival the perfection of those ancient masters

Clarke: 1Co 9:2

In the Lord - The apostle shows that it was by the grace and influence of God alone that he was an apostle, and that they were converted to Christianity.

Clarke: 1Co 9:3

Mine answer to them - Ἡ εμη απολογια τοις εμε ανακρινουσιν· This is my defense against those who examine me. The words are forensic; and the apostle considers himself as brought before a legal tribunal, and questioned so as to be obliged to answer as upon oath. His defense therefore was this, that they were converted to God by his means. This verse belongs to the two preceding verses.

Clarke: 1Co 9:4

Have we not power to eat and to drink? - Have we not authority, or right, εξουσιαν, to expect sustenance, while we are labouring for your salvation? Meat and drink, the necessaries, not the superfluities, of life, were what those primitive messengers of Christ required; it was just that they who labored in the Gospel should live by the Gospel; they did not wish to make a fortune, or accumulate wealth; a living was all they desired. It was probably in reference to the same moderate and reasonable desire that the provision made for the clergy in this country was called a living; and their work for which they got this living was called the cure of souls. Whether we derive the word cure from cura , care, as signifying that the care of all the souls in a particular parish or place devolves on the minister, who is to instruct them in the things of salvation, and lead them to heaven; or whether we consider the term as implying that the souls in that district are in a state of spiritual disease, and the minister is a spiritual physician, to whom the cure of these souls is intrusted; still we must consider that such a laborer is worthy of his hire; and he that preaches the Gospel should live by the Gospel.

Clarke: 1Co 9:5

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife - The word εξουσιαν is to be understood here, as above in 1Co 9:4, as implying authority or right; and authority, not merely derived from their office, but from Him who gave them that office; from the constitution of nature; and from universal propriety or the fitness of things

When the apostle speaks of leading about a sister, a wife, he means first, that he and all other apostles, and consequently all ministers of the Gospel, had a right to marry. For it appears that our Lord’ s brethren James and Jude were married; and we have infallible evidence that Peter was a married man, not only from this verse, but from Mat 8:14, where his mother-in-law is mentioned as being cured by our Lord of a fever

And secondly, we find that their wives were persons of the same faith; for less can never be implied in the word sister. This is a decisive proof against the papistical celibacy of the clergy: and as to their attempts to evade the force of this text by saying that the apostles had holy women who attended them, and ministered to them in their peregrinations, there is no proof of it; nor could they have suffered either young women or other men’ s wives to have accompanied them in this way without giving the most palpable occasion of scandal. And Clemens Alexandrinus has particularly remarked that the apostles carried their wives about with them, "not as wives, but as sisters, that they might minister to those who were mistresses of families; that so the doctrine of the Lord might without reprehension or evil suspicion enter into the apartments of the women."And in giving his finished picture of his Gnostic, or perfect Christian, he says: εσθιει, και πινει, και γαμει - εικονας εχει τους Αποστολους, He eats, and drinks, and marries - having the apostles for his example. Vid. Clem. Alex. Strom., lib. vii., c. 12

On the propriety and excellence of marriage, and its superiority to celibacy, see the notes on 1Co 7:1, etc.

Clarke: 1Co 9:6

Or I only and Barnabas - Have we alone of all the apostles no right to be supported by our converts? It appears from this

1.    That the apostles did not generally support themselves by their own labor

2.    That Paul and Barnabas did thus support themselves

Some of the others probably had not a business at which they could conveniently work; but Paul and Barnabas had a trade at which they could conveniently labor wherever they came.

Clarke: 1Co 9:7

Who goeth a warfare - at his own charges? - These questions, which are all supposed from the necessity and propriety of the cases to be answered in the affirmative, tend more forcibly to point out that the common sense of man joins with the providence of God in showing the propriety of every man living by the fruits of his labor. The first question applies particularly to the case of the apostle, τις στρατευεται ιδιοις οψωνιοις· Does a soldier provide his own victuals? Οψωνιον is used to express the military pay or wages, by the Greek writers; for the Roman soldiers were paid not only in money but in victuals; and hence corn was usually distributed among them. See on Luk 3:14 (note).

Clarke: 1Co 9:8

Say I these things as a man? - Is this only human reasoning? or does not God say in effect the same things? See note on Rom 6:19.

Clarke: 1Co 9:9

Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox - See this largely explained in the note on Deu 25:4 (note)

Clarke: 1Co 9:9

Doth God take care for oxen? - This question is to be understood thus: Is it likely that God should be solicitous for the comfort of oxen, and be regardless of the welfare of man? In this Divine precept the kindness and providential care of God are very forcibly pointed out. He takes care of oxen; he wills them all that happiness of which their nature is susceptible; and can we suppose that he is unwilling that the human soul shall have that happiness which is suited to its spiritual and eternal nature? He could not reprobate an ox, because the Lord careth for oxen; and surely he cannot reprobate a man. It may be said the man has sinned but the ox cannot. I answer: The decree of reprobation is supposed to be from all eternity; and certainly a man can no more sin before he exists, than an ox can when he exists.

Clarke: 1Co 9:10

And he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope - Instead of ὁ αλοων της ελπιδος αυτου μετεχειν, επ ’ ελπιδι, many of the best MSS. and versions read the passage thus: ὁ αλοων επ ’ ελπιδι του μετεχειν· And he who thresheth in hope of partaking. "The words της ελπιδος, which are omitted by the above, are,"says Bp. Pearce, "superfluous, if not wrong; for men do not live in hope to partake of their hope, but to partake of what was the object and end of their hope. When these words are left out, the former and latter sentence will be both of a piece, and more resembling each other: for μετεχειν may be understood after the first επ ’ ελπιδι, as well as after the last."Griesbach has left the words in question out of the text.

Clarke: 1Co 9:11

If we have sown unto you spiritual things - If we have been the means of bringing you into a state of salvation by the Divine doctrines which we have preached unto you, is it too much for us to expect a temporal support then we give ourselves up entirely to this work? Every man who preaches the Gospel has a right to his own support and that of his family while thus employed.

Clarke: 1Co 9:12

If others be partakers of this power - If those who in any matter serve you have a right to a recompense for that service, surely we who have served you in the most essential matters have a right to our support while thus employed in your service

Clarke: 1Co 9:12

We have not used this power - Though we had this right, we have not availed ourselves of it, but have worked with our hands to bear our own charges, lest any of you should think that we preached the Gospel merely to procure a temporal support, and so be prejudiced against us, and thus prevent our success in the salvation of your souls.

Clarke: 1Co 9:13

They which minister about holy things - All the officers about the temple, whether priests, Levites, Nethinim, etc., had a right to their support while employed in its service. The priests partook of the sacrifices; the others had their maintenance from tithes, first fruits, and offerings made to the temple; for it was not lawful for them to live on the sacrifices. Hence the apostle makes the distinction between those who minister about holy things and those who wait at the altar.

Clarke: 1Co 9:14

Even so hath the Lord ordained - This is evidently a reference to our Lord’ s ordination, Mat 10:10 : The workman is worthy of his meat. And Luk 10:7 : For the laborer is worthy of his hire. And in both places it is the preacher of the Gospel of whom he is speaking. It was a maxim among the Jews, "that the inhabitants of a town where a wise man had made his abode should support him, because he had forsaken the world and its pleasures to study those things by which he might please God and be useful to men."See an ordinance to this effect in the tract Shabbath, fol. 114.

Clarke: 1Co 9:15

Neither have I written, etc. - Though I might plead the authority of God in the law, of Christ in the Gospel, the common consent of our own doctors, and the usages of civil society, yet I have not availed myself of my privileges; nor do I now write with the intention to lay in my claims.

Calvin: 1Co 9:1

1.Am I not free? He confirms by facts what he had stated immediately before, — that he would rather never taste of flesh during his whole life, than give occasion of stumbling to a brother, and, at the same time, he shows that he requires nothing more from them than what he had himself practiced. And, assuredly, natural equity requires that whatever law is imposed by any one upon others, should be submitted to by himself. More especially a Christian teacher should impose upon himself this necessity, that he may have it always in his power to confirm his doctrine by an exemplary life. We know by experience, that it is a very unpleasant thing that Paul required from the Corinthians — to refrain, for the sake of their brethren, from making use of the liberty that was allowed them. He could scarcely have demanded this, if he had not taken the lead and shown them the way. And he had, it is true, promised that he would do this, but, as he might not be believed by all on his simply promising for the future, he makes mention of what he had already done. He brings forward a remarkable instance, in respect of his having denied himself the liberty which he might otherwise have used, purely in order that he might give the false Apostles no occasion for calumniating. He had preferred to earn his food with his own hands, rather than be supported at the expense of the Corinthians, to whom he administered the Gospel.

He treats, however, at great length of the right of the Apostles to receive food and clothing. This he does, partly for the purpose of stirring them up the more to forego many things for the sake of their brethren after his example, because they were unduly tenacious in the retaining of their own rights, and partly for the purpose of exposing more fully in view the unreasonableness of calumniators, who took occasion for reviling from what was anything but blameworthy. He speaks, also, interrogatively, in order to press the matter home more closely. The question — Am I not free? is of a general nature. When he adds — Am I not an Apostle ? he specifies a particular kind of liberty. “If I am an Apostle of Christ, why should my condition be worse than that of others?” Hence he proves his liberty on the ground of his being an Apostle.

Have I not seen Jesus Christ ? He expressly adds this, in order that he may not be reckoned inferior in any respect, to the other Apostles, for this one thing the malevolent and envious bawled out on all occasions — that he had received from the hands of men whatever he had of the gospel, inasmuch as he had never seen Christ. And, certainly, he had not had converse with Christ while he was in the world, but Christ had appeared to him after his resurrection. It was not a smaller privilege, however, to have seen Christ in his immortal glory, than to have seen him in the abasement of mortal flesh. He makes mention, also, afterwards of this vision, (1Co 15:8,) and mention is made of it twice in the Acts, (Act 9:3, and Act 22:6.) Hence this passage tends to establish his call, because, although he had not been set apart as one of the twelve, there was no less authority in the appointment which Christ published from heaven.

Are not ye my work ? He now, in the second place, establishes his Apostleship from the effect of it, because he had gained over the Corinthians to the Lord by the gospel. Now this is a great thing that Paul claims for himself, when he calls their conversion his work, for it is in a manner a new creation of the soul. But how will this correspond with what we had above — that

he that planteth is nothing, and he that watereth is nothing?
(1Co 3:7.)

I answer, that as God is the efficient cause, while man, with his preaching, is an instrument that can do nothing of itself, we must always speak of the efficacy of the ministry in such a manner that the entire praise of the work may be reserved for God alone. But in some cases, when the ministry is spoken of, man is compared with God, and then that statement holds good — He that planteth is nothing, and he that watereth is nothing; for what can be left to a man if he is brought into competition with God? Hence Scripture represents ministers as nothing in comparison with God; but when the ministry is simply treated of without any comparison with God, then, as in this passage, its efficacy is honorably made mention of, with signal encomiums. For, in that case, the question is not, what man can do of himself without God, but, on the contrary, God himself, who is the author, is conjoined with the instrument, and the Spirit’s influence with man’s labor. In other words, the question is not, what man himself accomplishes by his own power, but what God effects through his hands.

Calvin: 1Co 9:2

2.If I am not an Apostle to others The sum of this tends to the establishing of his authority among the Corinthians, so as to place it beyond all dispute. “If there are those,” says he, “who have doubts as to my Apostleship, to you, at least, it ought to be beyond all doubt, for, as I planted your Church by my ministry, you are either not believers, or you must necessarily recognize me as an Apostle. And that he may not seem to rest in mere words, he states that the reality itself was to be seen, ⁴⁷⁹ because God had sealed his Apostleship by the faith of the Corinthians. Should any one, however, object, that this suits the false Apostles too, who gather disciples to themselves, I answer, that pure doctrine is above all things required, in order that any one may have a confirmation of his ministry in the sight of God from its effect. There is nothing, therefore, here to furnish impostors with matter of congratulation, if they have deceived any of the populace, nay, even nations and kingdoms, by their falsehoods. Although in some cases persons are the occasion of spreading the kingdom of Christ, who, nevertheless, do not preach the gospel sincerely, as is said in Phi 1:16, it is not without good reason that Paul infers from the fruit of his labor, that he is divinely commissioned: for the structure of the Corinthian Church was such, that the blessing of God could easily be seen shining forth in it, which ought to have served as a confirmation of Paul’s office.

Calvin: 1Co 9:3

3.My defense Apart from the principal matter that he has at present in hand, it appears also to have been his intention to beat down, in passing, the calumnies of those who clamored against his call, as if he had been one of the ordinary class of ministers. “I am accustomed,” says he, “to put you forward as my shield, in the event of any one detracting from the honor of my Apostleship.” Hence it follows, that the Corinthians are injurious and inimical to themselves, if they do not acknowledge him as such, for if their faith was a solemn attestation of Paul’s Apostleship, and his defense, against slanderers, the one could not be invalidated without the other falling along with it.

Where others read — those who interrogate me, I have rendered it — those that examine me — for he refers to those who raised a dispute as to his Apostleship. ⁴⁸⁰ Latin writers, I confess, speak of a criminal being interrogated ⁴⁸¹ according to the laws, but the meaning of the word ἀνακρίνειν which Paul makes use of, seemed to me to be brought out better in this way.

Calvin: 1Co 9:4

4.Have we not power ? He concludes from what has been already said, that he had a right to receive food and clothing from them, ⁴⁸² for Paul ate and drank, but not at the expense of the Church. This, then, was one liberty that he dispensed with. The other was, that he had not a wife — to be maintained, also, at the public expense. Eusebius infers from these words that Paul was married, but had left his wife somewhere, that she might not be a burden to the Churches, but there is no foundation for this, for he might bring forward this, even though unmarried. In honoring a Christian wife with the name of sister, he intimates, first of all, by this, how firm and lovely ought to be the connection between a pious pair, being held by a double tie. Farther he hints at the same time what modesty and honorable conduct ought to subsist between them. Hence, too, we may infer, how very far marriage is from being unsuitable to the ministers of the Church. I pass over the fact, that the Apostles made use of it, as to whose example we shall have occasion to speak ere long, but Paul here teaches, in general terms, what is allowable for all.

Calvin: 1Co 9:5

5.Even as the other Apostles In addition to the Lord’s permission, he mentions the common practice of others. And with the view of bringing out more fully the waiving of his right, he proceeds step by step. In the first place, he brings forward the Apostles He then adds, “Nay, even the brethren of the Lord themselves also make use of it without hesitation — nay more, Peter himself, to whom the first place is assigned by consent of all, allows himself the same liberty.” By the brethren of the Lord, he means John and James, who were accounted pillars, as he states elsewhere. (Gal 2:9.) And, agreeably to what is customary in Scripture, he gives the name of brethren to those who were connected with Him by relationship.

Now, if any one should think to establish Popery from this, he would act a ridiculous part. We confess that Peter was acknowledged as first among the Apostles, as it is necessary that in every society there should always be some one to preside over the others, and they were of their own accord prepared to respect Peter for the eminent endowments by which he was distinguished, as it is proper to esteem and honor all that excel in the gifts of God’s grace. That preeminence, however, was not lordship — nay more, it had nothing resembling lordship. For while he was eminent among the others, still he was subject to them as his colleagues. Farther, it is one thing to have pre-eminence in one Church, and quite another, to claim for one’s self a kingdom or dominion over the whole world. But indeed, even though we should concede everything as to Peter, what has this to do with the Pope? For as Matthias succeeded Judas, (Act 1:26,) so some Judas might succeed Peter. Nay more, we see that during a period of more than nine hundred years among his successors, or at least among those who boast that they are his successors, there has not been one who was one whit better than Judas. This, however, is not the place to treat of these points. Consult my Institutes. (Volume 3.)

One thing farther must here be noticed, that the Apostles had no horror of marriage, which the Papal clergy so much abominate, as unbecoming the sanctity of their order. But it was after their time that that admirable discovery was made, that the priests of the Lord are polluted if they have intercourse with their lawful wives; and, at length matters came to such a pitch, that Pope Syricius did not hesitate to call marriage “ a pollution of the flesh, in which no one can please God.” What then must become of the poor Apostles, who continued in that pollution until death? Here, however, they have contrived a refined subtilty to effect their escape; for they say that the Apostles gave up the use of the marriage bed, but led about their wives with them, that they might receive the fruits of the gospel, or, in other words, support at the public expense. As if they could not have been maintained by the Churches, unless they wandered about from place to place; and farther, as if it were a likely thing that they would run hither and thither of their own accord, and without any necessity, in order that they might live in idleness at the public expense! For as to the explanation given by Ambrose, as referring to other persons’ wives, who followed the Apostles for the purpose of hearing their doctrine, it is exceedingly forced.

Calvin: 1Co 9:7

7.Who hath gone a warfare at his own charges? It is the present tense that is used ⁴⁸³ as meaning — is accustomed to go a warfare. I have, however, with the view of taking off somewhat of the harshness, rendered it in the preterite. Now, by three comparisons, and these, too, taken from common life, he makes it out that it was allowable for him to live, if he chose, at the public expense of the Church, to show that he assumes nothing to himself but what human nature itself teaches us is reasonable. The first is taken from military law, for soldiers are wont to have their provisions furnished to them at the public expense. The second is taken from vine-dressers, for the husbandman plants a vine — not to throw away his pains, but to gather the fruit. The third is taken from keepers of cattle, for the shepherd does not lay out his labor for nothing, but eats of the milk of the flock — that is, he is supported from the produce. As natural equity points out this as reasonable, who will be so unjust as to refuse sustenance to the pastors of the Church? While it may happen, that some serve as soldiers at their own expense, as, for example, the Romans in ancient times, when no tribute was as yet paid, and there were no taxes, ⁴⁸⁴ this does not militate against Paul’s statement, for he simply takes his argument from common and everywhere received practice.

Calvin: 1Co 9:8

8.Say I these things as a man ? Lest any one should cavil, and say that in the things of the Lord the case is different, and therefore that he had to no purpose brought forward so many comparisons, he now adds, that the very same thing is commanded by the Lord. To speak as a man sometimes means — speaking according to the perverse judgment of the flesh, (as in Rom 3:5.) Here, however, it means — bringing forward only those things that are in common use among men, and are merely current (as they speak) in a human court. Now, that God himself designed that the labors of men should be remunerated by wages, he proves from this, that he prohibits the muzzling of the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn; and with the view of applying it to the subject in hand, he says, that God was not concerned as to oxen, but rather had regard to men.

In the first place, it may be asked, Why has he more particularly selected this proof, while he had in the law passages that were much clearer? as for example, Deu 24:15,

The wages of the hireling shall not remain with thee over night.

If any one, however, will take a nearer view, he will acknowledge that there is more force in this quotation, in which the Lord requires cattle to be taken care of, for from this it is inferred, from the less to the greater, how much equity he requires among men, when he wishes that it should be shown to brute animals. When he says, that God does not take care for oxen, you are not to understand him as meaning to exclude oxen from the care of God’s Providence, inasmuch as he does not overlook even the least sparrow. (Mat 6:26, and Mat 10:29.) Nor is it as if he meant to expound that precept allegorically, as some hair-brained spirits take occasion from this to turn everything into allegories. Thus they turn dogs into men, trees into angels, and turn all scripture into a laughing-stock.

Paul’s meaning is simple — that, when the Lord enjoins humanity to oxen, he does not do it for the sake of oxen, but rather from a regard to men, on whose account, too, the very oxen were created. That compassion, therefore, towards oxen should be a stimulus to us to stir up to the exercise of humanity among us, as Solomon says, (Pro 12:10,)

The righteous man hath a care over his beast,
but the bowels of the wicked are cruel.

Let it then be understood by you, that God is not so concerned for oxen, as to have had merely a regard to oxen in making that law, for he had mankind in view, and wished to accustom them to equity, that they might not defraud the workman of his hire. For it is not the ox that has the principal part in plowing or treading out the corn, but man, by whose industry the ox himself is set to work. Hence, what he immediately adds — He that ploweth, should plow in hope, etc. is an exposition of the precept, as if he had said, that it extends generally to any kind of recompense for labor.

Calvin: 1Co 9:10

10.Because he that ploweth ought to plow in hope There is a twofold reading in this passage, even in the Greek manuscripts, but the one that is more generally received is — He that thrasheth, in hope of partaking of his hope At the same time, the one that does not repeat the term hope twice in the second clause appears simpler, and more natural. ⁴⁸⁵ Hence, if I were at liberty to choose, I would prefer to read it thus: He that ploweth should plow in hope, and he that thrasheth in hope of participating As, however, the most of the Greek manuscripts agree in the former reading, and as the meaning remains the same, I have not ventured to make change upon it. Now he expounds the preceding injunction, and hence he says, that it is an unjust thing that the husbandman should lay out his pains to no purpose in plowing and thrashing, but that the end of his labor is the hope of receiving the fruits. As it is so, we may infer, that this belongs to oxen also, but Paul’s intention was to extend it farther, and apply it principally to men. Now, the husbandman is said to be a partaker of his hope, when he enjoys the produce which he has obtained when reaping, but hoped for when plowing.

Calvin: 1Co 9:11

11.If we have sown unto you spiritual things There was one cavil remaining — for it might be objected, that labors connected with this life should without doubt have food and clothing as their reward; and that plowing and thrashing yield fruit, of which those that labor in these things are partakers; but that it is otherwise with the gospel, because its fruit is spiritual; and hence the minister of the word, if he would receive fruit corresponding to his labor, ought to demand nothing that is carnal. Lest any one, therefore, should cavil in this manner, he argues from the greater to the less. “Though food and clothing are not of the same nature with a minister’s labors, what injury do you sustain, if you recompense what is inestimable with a thing that is small and contemptible? For in proportion to the superiority of the soul above the body, does the word of the Lord excel outward sustenance, ⁴⁸⁶ inasmuch as it is the food of the soul.”

Calvin: 1Co 9:12

12.If others assume this power over you Again he establishes his own right from the example of others. For why should he alone be denied what others assumed as their due? For as no one labored more than he among the Corinthians, no one was more deserving of a reward. He does not, however, make mention of what he has done, but of what he would have done in accordance with his right, if he had not of his own accord refrained from using it.

But we have not used this power He returns now to the point on which the matter hinges — that he had of his own accord given up that power which no one could refuse him, and that he was prepared rather to suffer all things, than by the use of his liberty throw any impediment in the way of the progress of the gospel. He wishes, therefore, that the Corinthians should, after his example, keep this end in view — to do nothing that would hinder or retard the progress of the gospel; for what he declares respecting himself it was their duty to perform according to their station; and he confirms here what he had said previously — that we must consider what is expedient (1Co 6:12.)

Calvin: 1Co 9:13

13.Know ye not, Apart from the question that he discusses, he appears to have dwelt the longer in taking notice of this point, with the view of reproaching the Corinthians indirectly for their malignity in allowing the ministers of Christ to be reviled in a matter that was so justifiable. For if Paul had not of his own accord refrained from using his liberty, there was a risk of the progress of the gospel being obstructed. Never would the false Apostles have gained that point, had not ingratitude, to which the Corinthians were already prone, opened up the way for their calumnies. For they ought to have repelled them sharply; but instead of this they showed themselves excessively credulous, so that they would have been prepared to reject the gospel, if Paul had used his right. Such contempt of the gospel, and such cruelty towards their Apostle, deserved to be more severely reproved; but Paul, having found another occasion, touches upon it indirectly and mildly, with his usual modesty, that he may admonish them without affronting them.

Again he makes use of a new comparison, to prove that he had not used the power that he had from the Lord. Nor does he any longer borrow examples from any other source, but shows that this has been appointed by the Lord — that the Churches should provide for the support of their ministers. There are some that think that there are two comparisons in this passage, and they refer the former to the Lord’s priests, and the latter to those that acted as priests to the heathen gods. I am, however, rather of opinion that Paul expresses, as he is accustomed, the same thing by different terms. And, truly, it would have been a weak argument that was derived from the practice of the heathens, among whom the revenues of the priesthood were not devoted to food and clothing, but to magnificent dresses, royal splendor, and profuse luxury. These would, therefore, have been things too remote. I do not call it in question, however, that he has pointed out different kinds of ministerial offices; for there were priests of a higher order, and there were afterwards Levites, who were inferior to them, as is well known; but that is not much to the point.

The sum is this — “The Levitical priests were ministers of the Israelitish Church; the Lord appointed them sustenance from their ministry; hence in ministers of the Christian Church the same equity must be observed at the present day. Now the ministers of the Christian Church are those that preach the gospel.” This passage is quoted by Canonists, when they wish to prove that idle bellies must be fattened up, in order that they may perform their masses; ⁴⁸⁸ but how absurdly, I leave it to children themselves to judge. Whatever is stated in the Scriptures as to the support to be given to ministers, or the honor that is to be put upon them, they immediately seize hold of it, and twist it to their own advantage. For my part, however, I simply admonish my readers to consider attentively Paul’s words. He argues that pastors, who labor in the preaching of the gospel, ought to be supported, because the Lord in ancient times appointed sustenance for the priests, on the ground of their serving the Church. Hence a distinction must be made between the ancient priesthood and that of the present day. Priests under the law were set apart to preside over the sacrifices, to serve the altar, and to take care of the tabernacle and temple. Those at the present day are set apart to preach the word and to dispense the sacraments. The Lord has appointed no sacrifices for his sacred ministers to be engaged in; ⁴⁸⁹ there are no altars for them to stand at to offer sacrifices.

Hence appears the absurdity of those who apply this comparison, taken from sacrifices, to anything else than to the preaching of the gospel. Nay farther, it may be readily inferred from this passage, that all Popish priests, from the head himself to the lowest member, are guilty of sacrilege, who devour the revenues appointed for true ministers, while they do not in any way discharge their duty. For what ministers does the Apostle order to be maintained? Those that apply themselves to the preaching of the gospel. What right then have they to claim for themselves the revenues of the priesthood? ⁴⁹⁰ “Because they hum a tune and perform mass.” ⁴⁹¹ But God has enjoined upon them nothing of that sort. Hence it is evident that they seize upon the reward due to others. When, however, he says that the Levitical priests were partakers with the altar, and that they ate of the things of the Temple, he marks out (μετωνυμικῶς) by metonymy, the offerings that were presented to God. For they claimed to themselves the sacred victims entire, and of smaller animals they took the right shoulder, and kidneys and tail, and, besides this, tithes, oblations, and first-fruits. The word ἱερόν, therefore, in the second instance, ⁴⁹² is taken to mean the Temple.

Calvin: 1Co 9:15

15.Nor have I written these things As he might seem to be making it his aim, that in future a remuneration should be given him by the Corinthians, he removes that suspicion, and declares that, so far from this being his desire, he would rather die than give occasion for his being deprived of this ground of glorying — that he bestowed labor upon the Corinthians without any reward. Nor is it to be wondered that he set so high a value upon this glorying, inasmuch as he saw that the authority of the gospel in some degree depended upon it. For he would in this way have given a handle to the false apostles to triumph over him. Hence there was a danger, lest the Corinthians, despising him, should receive them with great applause. So much did he prefer, even before his own life, the power of advancing the gospel.

Defender: 1Co 9:1

Evidently a key requirement for the apostolic office was that of having been directly chosen and called by Jesus Christ in person, as Paul had been on the road to Damascus (Act 9:3-6, Act 9:15, Act 9:16). Note also the requisites for choosing a successor to Judas (Act 1:21, Act 1:22), indicating they also must have witnessed the resurrected Christ. Thus, no true apostles are living today."

Defender: 1Co 9:5

Although Paul had recommended the celibate state as conducive to full-time dedication to the Lord's service (1Co 7:32, 1Co 7:33), he clearly recognized that it was also good to be married (1Co 7:2, 1Co 7:38), and that even the apostles had such a right if they so chose. There is no Biblical requirement for a celibate clergy. Peter (same as "Cephas"), for example, had a wife (Mat 8:14)."

Defender: 1Co 9:9

This passage is quoted from Deu 25:4. See also 1Ti 5:18. Paul stressed that, even though he had a right to marry, he chose not to for the gospel's sake. Similarly, he and others who preach the gospel had the right to be supported by those who had profited thereby (1Co 9:14), but he chose not to, in order not to be a stumbling block to those who needed it (1Co 9:15)."

TSK: 1Co 9:1

I not an : 1Co 9:2, 1Co 9:3, 1Co 1:1, 1Co 15:8, 1Co 15:9; Act 9:15, Act 13:2, Act 14:4, Act 22:14, Act 22:15, Act 16:17, Act 16:18; Rom 1:1, Rom 1:5; Rom 11:13; 2Co 11:5, 2Co 12:11, 2Co 12:12; Gal 1:1, Gal 1:15-17, Gal 2:7, Gal 2:8; 1Ti 2:7; 2Ti 1:11; Tit 1:1-3

am I not free : 1Co 9:19; Gal 5:1

have : 1Co 15:8; Act 9:3, Act 9:5, Act 9:17, Act 18:9, Act 22:6-8, Act 22:14-21, Act 23:11, Act 26:16-18

are : 1Co 3:6, 1Co 4:14, 1Co 4:15; Act 18:8-11; 2Co 6:1

TSK: 1Co 9:2

for : Joh 6:27; 2Co 3:1-3, 2Co 12:12

TSK: 1Co 9:3

answer : Act 22:1, Act 25:16; Phi 1:7, Phi 1:17; 2Ti 4:16 *Gr.

them : 1Co 14:37; 2Co 10:7, 2Co 10:8, 2Co 12:16-19, 2Co 13:3, 2Co 13:5, 2Co 13:10

TSK: 1Co 9:4

we : 1Co 9:7-14; Mat 10:10; Luk 10:7; Gal 6:6; 1Th 2:6; 2Th 3:8, 2Th 3:9; 1Ti 5:17, 1Ti 5:18

TSK: 1Co 9:5

to lead : 1Ti 3:2, 1Ti 4:3; Tit 1:6; Heb 13:4

a sister : 1Co 7:15, 1Co 7:39; Son 4:9, Son 4:10,Son 4:12, Son 5:1, Son 5:2; Rom 16:1; 1Ti 5:2

wife : or, woman

the brethren : Mat 12:46-50, Mat 13:55; Mar 6:3; Luk 6:15; Joh 2:12; Act 1:14; Gal 1:19

Cephas : 1Co 1:12; Mat 8:14; Mar 1:30; Joh 1:42

TSK: 1Co 9:6

Barnabas : Act 4:36, Act 11:22, Act 13:1, Act 13:2, Act 13:50, Act 14:12, Act 15:36, Act 15:37

have : 1Co 4:11, 1Co 4:12; Act 18:3, Act 20:34, Act 20:35; 1Th 2:9; 2Th 3:7-9

TSK: 1Co 9:7

goeth : 2Co 10:4, 2Co 10:5; 1Ti 1:18, 1Ti 6:12; 2Ti 2:3, 2Ti 2:4, 2Ti 4:7

planteth : 1Co 3:6-8; Deu 20:6; Pro 27:18; Son 8:12

or : Jer 23:2, Jer 23:3; Joh 21:15-17; Act 20:28; 1Pe 5:2

eateth not of the milk : Pro 27:27; Isa 7:22

TSK: 1Co 9:8

as : 1Co 7:40; Rom 6:19; 1Th 2:13, 1Th 4:8

or : 1Co 14:34; Isa 8:20; Rom 3:31

TSK: 1Co 9:9

Thou : Deu 25:4; 1Ti 5:18

Doth : Num 22:28-35; Deu 5:14; Psa 104:27, Psa 145:15, Psa 145:16, Psa 147:8, Psa 147:9; Jon 4:11; Mat 6:26-30; Luk 12:24-28

TSK: 1Co 9:10

For : Mat 24:22; Rom 15:4; 2Co 4:15

that ploweth : 1Co 3:9; Luk 17:7, Luk 17:8; Joh 4:35-38; 2Ti 2:6

TSK: 1Co 9:11

sown : Mal 3:8, Mal 3:9; Mat 10:10; Rom 15:27; Gal 6:6

a great : 2Ki 5:13; 2Co 11:15

TSK: 1Co 9:12

others : 2Co 11:20

are not : 1Co 9:2, 1Co 4:14, 1Co 4:15

Nevertheless : 1Co 9:15, 1Co 9:18; Act 20:31-34; 2Co 11:7-10, 2Co 12:13, 2Co 12:14; 1Th 2:6-9; 2Th 3:8, 2Th 3:9

but : 1Co 4:11, 1Co 4:12, 1Co 6:7

hinder : Gen 24:56; Neh 4:8; Luk 11:52; Rom 15:22; 2Co 11:12

TSK: 1Co 9:13

they : 1Co 10:18; Lev 6:16-18, Lev 6:26, Lev 7:6-8; Num 5:9, Num 5:10, Num 18:8-20; Deu 10:9, Deu 18:1-5; 1Sa 2:28

live : or, feed

TSK: 1Co 9:14

ordained : 1Co 9:4; Mat 10:10; Luk 10:7; Gal 6:6; 1Ti 5:17

TSK: 1Co 9:15

I have : 1Co 9:12, 1Co 4:12; Act 8:3, Act 20:34; 1Th 2:9; 2Th 3:8

neither : 2Co 11:9-12, 2Co 12:13-18

for : Mat 18:6; Act 20:24; Phi 1:20-23

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 1Co 9:1

Am I not an apostle? - This was the point to be settled; and it is probable that some at Corinth had denied that he could be an apostle, since it was requisite, in order to that, to have seen the Lord Jesus; and since it was supposed that Paul had not been a witness of his life, doctrines, and death.

Am I not free? - Am I not a free man; have I not the liberty which all Christians possess, and especially which all the apostles possess? The "liberty"referred to here is doubtless the privilege or right of abstaining from labor; of enjoying as others did the domestic relations of life; and of a support as a public minister and apostle. Probably some had objected to his claims of apostleship that he had not used this right, and that he was conscious that he had no claim to it. By this mode of interrogation, he strongly implies that he was a freeman, and that he had this right.

Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? - Here it is implied, and seems to be admitted by Paul, that in order to be an "apostle"it was necessary to have seen the Saviour. This is often declared expressly; see the note at Act 1:21-22. The reason of this was, that the apostles were appointed to be witnesses of the life, doctrines, death, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and that in their "being witnesses"consisted the uniqueness of the apostolic office. That this was the case is abundantly manifest from Mat 28:18-19; Luk 24:48; Act 1:21-22; Act 2:32; Act 10:39-41. Hence, it was essential, in order that anyone should be such a witness, and an apostle, that he should have seen the Lord Jesus. In the case of Paul, therefore, who was called to this office after the death and resurrection of the Saviour, and who had not therefore had an opportunity of seeing and hearing him when living, this was provided for by the fact that the Lord Jesus showed himself to him after his death and ascension, in order that he might have this qualification for the apostolic office, Act 9:3-5, Act 9:17. To the fact of his having been thus in a miraculous manner qualified for the apostolic office, Paul frequently appeals, and always with the same view that it was necessary to have seen the Lord Jesus to qualify one for this office, Act 22:14-15; Act 26:16; 1Co 15:8. It follows from this, therefore, that no one was an apostle in the strict and proper sense who had not seen the Lord Jesus. And it follows, also, that the apostles could have no successors in that which constituted the uniqueness of their office; and that the office must have commenced and ended with them.

Are not ye my work in the Lord? - Have you not been converted by my labors, or under my ministry; and are you not a proof that the Lord, when I have been claiminG to be an apostle, has owned me "as an apostle,"and blessed me in this work? God would not give his sanction to an impostor, and a false pretender; and as Paul had labored there as an apostle, this was an argument that he had been truly commissioned of God. A minister may appeal to the blessing of God on his labors in proof that he is sent of Him. And one of the best of all arguments that a man is sent from God exists where multitudes of souls are converted from sin, and turned to holiness, by his labors. What better credentials than this can a man need that he is in the employ of God? What more consoling to his own mind? What more satisfactory to the world?

Barnes: 1Co 9:2

If I be not an apostle unto others - "If I have not given evidence to others of my apostolic mission; of my being sent by the Lord Jesus, yet I have to you. Assuredly you, among whom I have labored so long and so successfully, should not doubt that I am sent from the Lord. You have been well acquainted with me; you have witnessed my endowments, you have seen my success, and you have had abundant evidence that I have been sent on this great work. It is therefore strange in you to doubt my apostolic commission; and it is unkind in you so to construe my declining to accept your contributions and aid for my support, as if I were conscious that I was not entitled to that."

For the seal of mine apostleship. - Your conversion is the demonstration that I am an apostle. Paul uses strong language. He does not mean to say that their conversion furnished some evidence that he was an apostle; but that it was absolute proof, and unbreakable demonstration, that he was an apostle. A "seal"is that which is affixed to a deed, or other instrument, to make it firm, secure, and indisputable. It is the proof or demonstration of the validity of the conveyance, or of the writing; see the notes at Joh 3:33; Joh 6:27. The sense here is, therefore, that the conversion of the Corinthians was a certain demonstration that he was an apostle, and should be so regarded by them, and treated by them. It was such a proof:

(1)    Because Paul claimed to be an apostle while among them, and God blessed and owned this claim;

(2)    Their conversion could not have been accomplished by man. It was the work of God. It was the evidence then which God gave to Paul and to them, that he was with him, and had sent him.

(3)\caps1     t\caps0 hey knew him, had seen him, heard him, were acquainted with his doctrines and manner of life, and could bear testimony to what he was, and what he taught.

We may remark, that the conversion of sinners is the best evidence to a minister that he is sent of God. The divine blessing on his labors should cheer his heart, and lead him to believe that God has sent and that he approves him. And every minister should so live and labor, should so deny himself, that he may be able to appeal to the people among whom he labors that he is a minister of the Lord Jesus.

Barnes: 1Co 9:3

Mine answer - Greek Ἡ ἐμὴ ἀπολογία Hē emē apologia . My "apology;"my defense. The same word occurs in Act 22:1; Act 25:16; 2Co 7:11; Phi 1:7, Phi 1:17; 2Ti 4:16; 1Pe 3:15; see the note at Act 22:1. Here it means his answer, or defense against those who sat in judgment on his claims to be an apostle.

To them that do examine me. - To those who "inquire"of me; or who "censure"and condemn me as not having any claims to the apostolic office. The word used here ἀνακρίνω anakrinō is properly a forensic term, and is usually applied to judges in courts; to those who sit in judgment, and investigate and decide in litigated cases brought before them; Luk 23:14; Act 4:9; Act 12:19; Act 24:8. The apostle here may possibly allude to the arrogance and pride of those who presumed to sit as judges on his qualification for the apostolic office. It is not meant that this answer had been given by Paul before this, but that this was the defense which he had to offer.

Is this - This which follows; the statements which are made in the following verses. In these statements (1Co 9:4-6, etc.) he seems to have designed to take up their objections to his apostolic claims one by one, and to show that they were of no force.

Barnes: 1Co 9:4

Have we not power - ( ἐξουσίαν exousian ) Have we not the "right."The word "power"here is evidently used in the sense of "right"(compare Joh 1:12, "margin"); and the apostle means to say that though they had not exercised this "right by demanding"a maintenance, yet it was not because they were conscious that they had no such right, but because they chose to forego it for wise and important purposes.

To eat and to drink - To be maintained at the expense of those among whom we labor. Have we not a right to demand that they shall yield us a proper support? By the interrogative form of the statement, Paul intends more strongly to affirm that they had such a right. The interrogative mode is often adopted to express the strongest affirmation. The objection here urged seems to have been this, "You, Paul and Barnabas, labor with your own hands. Act 18:3. Other religious teachers lay claim to maintenance, and are supported without personal labor. This is the case with pagan and Jewish priests, and with Christian teachers among us. You must be conscious, therefore, that you are not apostles, and that you have no claim or right to support."To this the answer of Paul is, "We admit that we labor with our own hands. But your inference does not follow. It is not because we have not a right to such support, and it is not because we are conscious that we have no such claim, but it is for a higher purpose. It is because it will do good if we should not urge this right, and enforce this claim."That they had such a right, Paul proves at length in the subsequent part of the chapter.

Barnes: 1Co 9:5

Have we not power? - Have we not a right? The objection here seems to have been, that Paul and Barnabas were unmarried, or at least that they traveled without wives. The objectors urged that others had wives, and that they took them with them, and expected provision to be made for them as well as for themselves. They therefore showed that they felt that they had a claim to support for their families, and that they were conscious that they were sent of God. But Paul and Barnabas had no families. And the objectors inferred that they were conscious that they had no claim to the apostleship, and no right to support. To this Paul replies as before, that they had a right to do as others did, but they chose not to do it for other reasons than that they were conscious that they had no such right.

To lead about - To have in attendance with us; to conduct from place to place; and to have them maintained at the expense of the churches amongst which we labor.

A sister, a wife - Margin, "or woman."This phrase has much perplexed commentators. But the simple meaning seems to be, A wife who should be a Christian, and regarded as sustaining the relation of a Christian sister."Probably Paul meant to advert to the fact that the wives of the apostles were and should be Christians; and that it was a matter of course, that if an apostle led about a wife she would be a Christian; or that he would marry no other; compare 1Co 3:11.

As well as other apostles - It is evident from this that the apostles generally were married. The phrase used here is οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι hoi loipoi apostoloi ("the remaining apostles,"or the other apostles). And if they were married, it is right and proper for ministers to marry now, whatever the papist may say to the contrary. It is safer to follow the example of the apostles than the opinions of the papal church. The reasons why the apostles had wives with them on their journeys may have been various. They may have been either to give instruction and counsel to those of their own sex to whom the apostles could not have access, or to minister to the needs of their husbands as they traveled. It is to be remembered that they traveled among pagans; they had no acquaintance and no friends there; they therefore took with them their female friends and wives to minister to them, and sustain them in sickness, trial, etc. Paul says that he and Barnabas had a right to do this; but they had not used this right because they chose rather to make the gospel without charge 1Co 9:18, and that thus they judged they could do more good. It follows from this:

(1) That it is right for ministers to marry, and that the papal doctrine of the celibacy of the clergy is contrary to apostolic example.

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t is right for missionaries to marry, and to take their wives with them to pagan lands. The apostles were missionaries, and spent their lives in pagan nations as missionaries do now, and there may be as good reasons for missionaries marrying now as there were then.

\caps1 (3) y\caps0 et there are people, like Paul, who can do more good without being married. There are circumstances, like his, where it is not advisable that they should marry, and there can be no doubt that Paul regarded the unmarried state for a missionary as preferable and advisable. Probably the same is to be said of most missionaries at the present day, that they could do more good if unmarried, than they can if burdened with the cares of families.

And as the brethren of the Lord - The brothers of the Lord Jesus, James and Joses, and Simon and Judas, Mat 13:55. It seems from this, that although at first they did not believe in him Joh 7:5, and had regarded him as disgraced Mar 3:21, yet that they had subsequently become converted, and were employed as ministers and evangelists. It is evident also from this statement that they were married, and were attended with their wives in their travels.

And Cephas - Peter; see the note at Joh 1:42. This proves:

\caps1 (1) a\caps0 s well as the declaration in Mat 8:14, that Peter had been married.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat he had a wife after he became an apostle, and while engaged in the work of the ministry.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 hat his wife accompanied him in his travels.

\caps1 (4) t\caps0 hat it is right and proper for ministers and missionaries to be married now.

Is it not strange that the pretended successor of Peter, the pope of Rome, should forbid marriage when Peter himself was married? Is it not a proof how little the papacy regards the Bible, and the example and authority of those from whom it pretends to derive its power? And is it not strange that this doctrine of the celibacy of the clergy, which has been the source of abomination, impurity, and licentiousness everywhere, should have been sustained and countenanced at all by the Christian world? And is it not strange that this, with all the other corrupt doctrines of the papacy, should be attempted to be imposed on the enlightened people of the United States, or of Great Britain, as a part of the religion of Christ?

Barnes: 1Co 9:6

Or I only and Barnabas - Paul and Barnabas had worked together as tent-makers at Corinth; Act 18:3. From this fact it had been inferred that they "knew"that they had no claim to a support.

Power to forbear working - To abstain from labor, and to receive support as others do. The question implies a strong affirmation that they had such power. The sense is, ‘ Why should I and Barnabas be regarded as having no right to support? Have we been less faithful than others? Have we done less? Have we given fewer evidences that we are sent by the Lord, or that God approves us in our work? Have we been less successful? Why then should we be singled out; and why should it be supposed that we are obliged to labor for our support? "Is there no other conceivable reason"why we should support ourselves than a consciousness that we have no right to support from the people with whom we labor?"It is evident from 1Co 9:12, that Barnabas as well as Paul relinquished his right to a support, and labored to maintain himself. And it is manifest from the whole passage, that there was some special "spleen"("Doddridge") against these two ministers of the gospel. What it was we know not. It might have arisen from the enmity and opposition of Judaizing teachers, who were offended at their zeal and success among the Gentiles, and who could find no other cause of complaint against them than that they chose to support themselves, and not live in idleness, or to tax the church for their support. That must have been a bad cause which was sustained by such an argument.

Barnes: 1Co 9:7

Who goeth a warfare ... - Paul now proceeds to illustrate the right which he knew ministers had to a support 1Co 9:7-14, and then to show the reason why he had not availed himself of that right; 1Co 9:15-23. The right he illustrates from the nature of the case 1Co 9:7, 1Co 9:11; from the authority of Scripture 1Co 9:8-10; from the example of the priests under the Jewish law 1Co 9:18; and from the authority of Jesus Christ; 1Co 9:14. In this verse (7th) the right is enforced by the nature of the case, and by three illustrations. The first is, the right of a soldier or warrior to his wages. The Christian ministry is compared to a warfare, and the Christian minister to a soldier; compare 1Ti 1:18. The soldier had a right to receive pay from him who employed him. He did not go at his own expense. This was a matter of common equity; and on this principle all acted who enlisted as soldiers.

So Paul says it is but equitable also that the soldier of the Lord Jesus should be sustained, and should not be required to support himself. And why, we may ask, should he be, any more than the man who devotes his strength, and time, and talents to the defense of his country? The work of the ministry is as arduous, and as self-denying, and perhaps as dangerous, as the work of a soldier; and common justice, therefore, demands that he who devotes his youth, and health and life to it, for the benefit of others should have a competent support. Why should not he receive a competent support who seeks to save people, as well as he who lives to destroy them? Why not he who endeavors to recover them to God, and make them pure and happy, as well as he who lives to destroy life, and pour out human blood, and to fill the air with the shrieks of new made widows and orphans? Or why not he who seeks, though in another mode, to defend the great interests of his country, and to maintain the interests of justice, truth, and mercy, for the benefit of mankind, as well as he who is willing in the tented field to spend his time, or exhaust his health and life in protecting the rights of the nation?

At his own charges - His own expense. On the meaning of the word "charges"( ὀψωνίοις opsōniois ) see the note at Luk 3:14; compare Rom 6:23; 2Co 11:8. The word does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.

Who planteth a vineyard ... - This is the second illustration from the nature of the case, to show that ministers of the gospel have a right to support. The argument is this: ‘ It is reasonable that those who labor should have a fair compensation. A man who plants a vineyard does not expect to labor for nothing; he expects support from that labor, and looks for it from the vineyard. The vineyard owes its beauty, growth, and productiveness to him. It is reasonable, therefore, that from that vineyard he should receive a support, as a compensation for his toil. So we labor for your welfare. You derive advantage from our toil. We spend our time, and strength, and talent for your benefit; and it is reasonable that we should be supported while we thus labor for your good."The church of God is often compared to "a vineyard;"and this adds to the beauty of this illustration; see Isa 5:1-4; see the notes at Luk 20:9-16.

Who feedeth a flock ... - This is the third illustration drawn from the nature of the case, to show that ministers have a right to support. The word "feedeth"( ποιμαίνει poimainei ) denotes not only to "feed,"but to guard, protect, defend, as a shepherd does his flock; see the notes at Joh 21:15-17. "The wages of the shepherds in the East do not consist of ready money, but in a part of the milk of the flocks which they tend. Thus, Spon says of the shepherds in modern Greece, "These shepherds are poor Albanians, who feed the cattle, and live in huts built of rushes; they have a tenth part of the milk and of the lambs which is their whole wages; the cattle belong to the Turks."The shepherds in Ethiopia, also, according to Alvarez, have no pay except the milk and butter which they obtain from the cows, and on which they and their families subsist"- Rosenmuller. The church is often compared to a flock; see the note at Joh 10:1 ff.

The argument here is this: "A shepherd spends his days and nights in guarding his folds. He leads his flock to green pastures, he conducts them to still waters (compare Psa 23:2); he defends them from enemies; he guards the young, the sick, the feeble, etc. He spends his time in protecting it and providing for it. He expects support, when in the wilderness or in the pastures, mainly from the milk which the flock should furnish. He labors for their comfort; and it is proper that he should derive a maintenance from them, and he has a right to it. So the minister of the gospel watches for the good of souls. He devotes his time, strength, learning, talents, to their welfare. He instructs, guides, directs, defends; he endeavors to guard them against their spiritual enemies, and to lead them in the path of comfort and peace. He lives to instruct the ignorant; to warn and secure those who are in danger; to guide the perplexed; to reclaim the wandering; to comfort; the afflicted; to bind up the broken in heart; to attend on the sick; to be an example and an instructor to the young; and to be a counsellor and a pattern to all. As he labors for their good, it is no more than equal and right that they should minister to his temporal needs, and compensate him for his efforts to promote their happiness and salvation. And can anyone say that this is not right and just?

Barnes: 1Co 9:8

Say I these things as a man? - Do I speak this on my own authority, or without the sanction of God? Is not this, which appears to be so reasonable and equitable, also supported by the authority of God?

Or saith not the law the same also? - The Law of Moses, to which the "Jewish"part of the church at Corinth - which probably had mainly urged these objections - professed to bow with deference. Paul was accustomed, especially in arguing with the Jews, to derive his proofs from the Old Testament. In the previous verse he had shown that it was equitable that ministers of the gospel should be supported. In this and the following verses he shows that the same principle was recognized and acted on under the Jewish dispensation. He does not mean to say, by this example of the ox treading out the grain, that the law as given by Moses referred to the Christian ministry; but that the principle there was settled that the laborer should have a support, and that a suitable provision should not be withheld even from an ox; and if God so regarded the welfare of a brute when laboring, it was much more reasonable to suppose that he would require a suitable provision to be made for the ministers of religion.

Barnes: 1Co 9:9

For it is written - Deu 25:4.

In the law of Moses - See the note at Luk 24:44.

Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth ... - To muzzle means, "to bind the mouth; to fasten the mouth to prevent eating or biting"- Webster. This was done either by passing straps around the mouth, or by placing, as is now sometimes done, a small "basket"over the mouth, fastened by straps to the horns of the animal, so as to prevent its eating, but not to impede its breathing freely. This was an instance of the humanity of the laws of Moses. The idea is, that the ox should not be prevented from eating when it was in the midst of food; and that as it labored for its owner, it was entitled to support; and there was a propriety that it should be permitted to partake of the grain which it was threshing.

That treadeth ... - This was one of the common modes of threshing in the east, as it is with us; see the note and illustration on Mat 3:12.

The corn - The "grain,"of any kind; wheat, rye, barley, etc. Maize, to which we apply the word "corn,"was then unknown; see the note at Mat 12:1.

Doth God take care for oxen? - Doth God take care for oxen only? Or is not this rather "a principle"which shows God’ s care for all that labor, and the humanity and equity of his laws? And if he is so solicitous about the welfare of brutes as to frame an express law in their behalf, is it not to be presumed that the same "principle"of humanity and equity will run through all his dealings and requirements? The apostle does not mean to deny that God does take care for oxen, for the very law was proof that he did; but he means to ask whether it is to be supposed that God would regard the comfort of oxen and not of people also? Whether we are not to suppose that the same principle would apply also to those who labor in the service of God? He uses this passage, therefore, not as originally having reference to people, or to ministers of the gospel, which cannot be; but as establishing a general "principle"in regard to the equity and humanity of the divine laws; and as thus showing that the spirit of the law of God would lead to the conclusion that God intended that the laborer everywhere should have a competent support.

Barnes: 1Co 9:10

Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? - The word "altogether"( πάντως pantōs ) cannot mean that this was the "sole"and "only"design of the law, to teach that ministers of the gospel were entitled to support; for:

(1) This would be directly contrary to the law itself, which had some direct and undoubted reference to oxen;

(2) The scope of the argument here does not require this interpretation, since the whole object will be met by supposing that this settled a "principle"of humanity and equity in the divine law, according to which it was "proper"that ministers should have a support; and,

(3) The word "altogether"( πάντως pantōs ) does not of necessity require this interpretation. It may be rendered "chiefly, mainly, principally, or doubtless;"Luk 4:23, "Ye will ‘ surely’ ( πάντως pantōs certainly, surely, doubtless) say unto me this proverb,"etc.; Act 18:21, "I must ‘ by all means’ ( πάντως pantōs , certainly, surely) keep this feast; Act 21:22, "The multitude ‘ must needs’ ( πάντως pantōs , will certainly, surely, inevitably) come together,"etc.; Act 28:4, "‘ No doubt’ ( πάντως pantōs ) this man is a murderer,"etc. The word here, therefore, means that the "principle"stated in the law about the oxen was so broad and humane, that it might "certainly, surely, particularly"be regarded as applicable to the case under consideration. An important and material argument might be drawn from it; an argument from the less to the greater. The precept enjoined justice, equity, humanity; and that was more applicable to the case of the ministers of the gospel than to the case of oxen.

For our sakes ... - To show that the laws and requirements of God are humane, kind, and equitable; not that Moses had Paul or any other minister in his eye, but the "principle"was one that applied particularly to this case.

That he that ploweth ... - The Greek in this place would be more literally and more properly rendered, "For ( ὅτι hoti ) he that ploweth ought ( ὀφείλει opheilei ) to plow in hope;"that is, in hope of reaping a harvest, or of obtaining success in his labors; and the sense is, "The man who cultivates the earth, in order that he may be excited to industry and diligence, ought to have a reasonable prospect that he shall himself be permitted to enjoy the fruit of his labors. This is the case with those who do plow; and if this should be the case with those who cultivate the earth, it is as certainly reasonable that those who labor in God’ s husbandry, and who devote their strength to his service, should be encouraged with a reasonable prospect of success and support."

And that he that thresheth ... - This sentence, in the Greek, is very elliptical and obscure; but the sense is, evidently, "He that thresheth ‘ ought’ to partake of his hope;"that is, of the fruits of his hope, or of the result of his labor. It is fair and right that he should enjoy the fruits of his toil. So in God’ s husbandry; it is right and proper that they who toil for the advancement of his cause should be supported and rewarded."The same sentiment is expressed in 2Ti 2:6, "The husbandman that laboreth must be first partaker of the fruits."

Barnes: 1Co 9:11

If we have sown unto you spiritual things - If we have been the means of imparting to you the gospel, and bestowing upon you its high hopes and privileges; see the note at Rom 15:27. The figure of "sowing,"to denote the preaching of the gospel, is not unfrequently employed in the Scriptures; see Joh 4:37, and the parable of the sower, Mat 13:3 ff.

Is it a great thing ... - See the note at Rom 15:27. Is it to be regarded as unequal, unjust, or burdensome? Is it to be supposed that we are receiving that for which we have not rendered a valuable consideration? The sense is, "We impart blessings of more value than we receive. We receive a supply of our temporal needs. We impart to you, under the divine blessing, the gospel, with all its hopes and consolations. We make you acquainted with God; with the plan of salvation; with the hope of heaven. We instruct your children; we guide you in the path of comfort and peace; we raise you from the degradations of idolatry and of sin; and we open before you the hope of the resurrection of the just, and of all the bliss of heaven; and to do this, we give ourselves to toil and peril by land and by sea. And can it be made a matter of question whether all these high and exalted hopes are of as much value to dying man as the small amount which shall be needful to minister to the needs of those who are the means of imparting these blessings?"Paul says this, therefore, from the reasonableness of the case. The propriety of support might be further urged:

(1) Because without it the ministry would be comparatively useless. Ministers, like physicians, lawyers, and farmers, should be allowed to attend mainly to the great business of their lives, and to their appropriate work. No physician, no farmer, no mechanic, could accomplish much, if his attention was constantly turned off from his appropriate business to engage in something else. And how can the minister of the gospel, if his time is nearly all taken up in laboring to provide for the needs of his family?

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 he great mass of ministers spend their early days, and many of them all their property, in preparing to preach the gospel to others. And as the mechanic who has spent his early years in learning a trade, and the physician and lawyer in preparing for their profession, receive support in that calling, why should not the minister of the gospel?

\caps1 (3) p\caps0 eople in other things cheerfully pay those who labor for them. They compensate the schoolmaster, the physician, the lawyer; the merchant, the mechanic; and they do it cheerfully, because they suppose they receive a valuable consideration for their money. But is it not so with regard to ministers of the gospel? Is not a man’ s family as certainly benefited by the labors of a faithful clergyman and pastor, as by the skill of a physician or a lawyer, or by the service of the schoolmaster? Are not the affairs of the soul and of eternity as important to a man’ s family as those of time and the welfare of the body? So the music-master and the dancing master are paid, and paid cheerfully and liberally; and yet can there be any comparison between the value of their services and those of the minister of the gospel?

\caps1 (4) i\caps0 t might be added, that society is benefited in a "pecuniary"way by the service of a faithful minister to a far greater extent than the amount of compensation which he receives. One drunkard, reformed under his labors, may earn and save to his family and to society as much as the whole salary of the pastor. The promotion of order, peace, sobriety, industry, education, and regularity in business, and honesty in contracting and in paying debts, saves much more to the community at large than the cost of the support of the gospel. In regard to this, any man may make the comparison at his leisure, between those places where the ministry is established, and where temperance, industry, and sober habits prevail, and those places where there is no ministry, and where gambling, idleness, and dissipation abound. It is always a matter of "economy"to a people, in the end, to support schoolmasters and ministers as they ought to be supported.

Reap your carnal things - Partake of those things which relate to the present life; the support of the body, that is, food and raiment.

Barnes: 1Co 9:12

If others - Other teachers living with you. There can be no doubt that the teachers in Corinth urged this right, and received a support.

Be partakers of this power - Of this right to a support and maintenance.

Are not we rather - We the apostles; we who have labored for your conversion; who have founded your church; who have been the first, and the most laborious in instructing you, and imparting to you spiritual blessings? Have not we a better claim than they?.

Nevertheless we have not used this power - We have not urged this claim; we have chosen to forego this right, and to labor for our own support. The reason why they had done this, he states in the subsequent part of the chapter; see 2Co 11:7-9; 2Co 12:14; compare Act 18:3; Act 20:34-35.

But suffer all things - Endure all privations and hardships; we subject ourselves to poverty, want, hunger, thirst, nakedness, rather than urge a "claim"on you, and thus leave the suspicion that we are actuated by mercenary motives. The word used here ( στέγομεν stegomen suffer) means properly "to cover,"to keep off, as rain, etc., and then "to contain, to sustain, tolerate, endure."Here it means to bear, or endure all hardships; compare the notes at 1Co 4:11-13.

Lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ - Paul here states the reason why he had not urged a claim to support in preaching the gospel. It was not because he was not entitled to a full support, but it was that by denying himself of this right he could do good, and avoid some evil consequences which would have resulted if he had strenuously urged it. His conduct therefore in this was just one illustration of the principle on which he said 1Co 8:13 he would always act; a readiness to deny himself of things lawful, if by that he could promote the welfare of others. The reasons why his urging this claim might have hindered the gospel may have been many:

(1) It might have exposed him and the ministry generally to the charge of being mercenary.

\caps1 (2) i\caps0 t would have prevented his presenting in bold relief the fact that he was bound to preach the gospel at all events, and that he was actuated in it by a simple conviction of its truth.

\caps1 (3) i\caps0 t might have alienated many minds who might otherwise have been led to embrace it.

\caps1 (4) i\caps0 t would have prevented the exercise of self-denial in him, and the benefits which resulted from that self-denial, etc., 1Co 9:17-18, 1Co 9:23, 1Co 9:27.

Barnes: 1Co 9:13

Do ye not know ... - In this verse Paul illustrates the doctrine that the ministers of religion were, entitled to a support from the fact that those who were appointed to offer sacrifice receive a maintenance in their work.

They which minister about holy things - Probably the "Levites."Their office was to render assistance to the priests, to keep guard around the tabernacle, and subsequently around the temple. It was also their duty to see that the temple was kept clean, and to prepare supplies for the sanctuary, such as oil, wine, incense, etc. They had the care of the revenues, and after the time of David were required to sing in the temple, and to play upon instruments. Num. 3:1-36; Num 4:1, Num 4:30, Num 4:35, Num 4:42; 8:5-22; 1Ch 23:3-5, 1Ch 23:24, 1Ch 23:27; 1Ch 24:20-31.

Live of the things of the temple - Margin, "Feed;"that is, are supported in their work by the offerings of the people, and by the provisions which were made for the temple service; see Num 18:24-32.

And they which wait at the altar - Probably the priests who were employed in offering sacrifice.

Are partakers with the altar - That is, a part of the animal offered in sacrifice is burned as an offering to God, and a part becomes the property of the priest for his support; and thus the altar and the priest become joint participators of the sacrifice. From these offerings the priest derived their maintenance; see Num 18:8-19; Deu 18:1, etc. The argument of the apostle here is this: "As the ministers of religion under the Jewish dispensation were entitled to support by the authority and the law of God, that fact settles a general principle which is applicable also to the gospel, that he intends that the ministers of religion should derive their support in their work. If it was reasonable then, it is reasonable now. If God commanded it then, it is to be presumed that he intends to require it now.

Barnes: 1Co 9:14

Even so - In the same manner, and for the same reasons.

Hath the Lord ordained - Hath the Lord appointed, commanded, "arranged"that it should be so ( διέταξε dietaxe ). The word here means that he has made this a law, or has required it. The word "Lord"here doubtless refers to the Lord Jesus, who has sent forth his ministers to labor in the great harvest of the world.

That they which preach the gospel - They who are sent forth by him; who devote their lives to this work; who are called and employed by him in this service. This refers, therefore, not only to the apostles, but to all who are duly called to this work, and who are his ambassadors.

Should live of the gospel - Should be supported and maintained in this work. Paul here probably refers to the appointment of the Lord Jesus, when he sent forth his disciples to preach, Mat 10:10; Luk 10:8; compare Gal 6:6. The man may be said to "live in the gospel"who is supported while he preaches it, or wire derives his maintenance in that work. Here we may observe:

(1) That the command is that they shall "live"( ζῇν zēn ) of the gospel. It is not that they should grow rich, or lay up treasures, or speculate in it, or become merchants, farmers, teachers, or bookmakers for a living; but it is that they should have such a maintenance as to constitute a livelihood. They should be made comfortable; not rich. They should receive so much as to keep their minds from being harassed with cares, and their families from want not so much as to lead them to forget their dependence on God, or on the people. Probably the true rule is, that they should be able to live as the mass of the people among whom they labor live; that they should be able to receive and entertain the poor, and be willing to do it; and so that the rich also may not despise them, or turn away from their dwelling.

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 his is a command of the Lord Jesus; and if it is a command, it should be obeyed as much as any other law of the Redeemer. And if this is a command, then the minister is entitled to a support; and then also a people are not at liberty to withhold it. Further, there are as strong reasons why they should support him, as there are why they should pay a schoolmaster, a lawyer, a physician, or a day-laborer. The minister usually toils as hard as others; expends as much in preparing for his work; and does as much good. And there is even a higher claim in this case. God has given an express command in this case; he has not in the others.

\caps1 (3) t\caps0 he salary of a minister should not be regarded as a "gift"merely, any more than the pay of a congressman, a physician, or a lawyer. He has a claim to it; and God has commanded that it should be paid. It is, moreover, a matter of stipulation and of compact, by which a people agree to compensate him for his services. And yet, is there anything in the shape of "debt"where there is so much looseness as in regard to this subject? Are people usually as conscientious in this as they are in paying a physician or a merchant? Are not ministers often in distress for that which has been promised them, and which they have a right to expect? And is not their usefulness, and the happiness of the people, and the honor of religion intimately connected with obeying the rule of the Lord Jesus in this respect?

Barnes: 1Co 9:15

But I have used none of these things - I have not urged and enforced this right. I have chosen to support myself by the labor of my own hands. This had been objected to him as a reason why he could not be an apostle. He here shows that that was not the reason why he had not; urged this claim; but that it was because in this way he could do most to honor the gospel and save the souls of people; compare Act 20:33; 2Th 3:8. The sense is, "Though my right to a support is established, in common with others, both by reason, the nature of the case, the examples in the law, and the command of the Lord Jesus, yet there are reasons why I have not chosen to avail myself of this right, and why I have not urged these claims."

Neither have I written these things ... - "I have not presented this argument now in order to induce you to provide for me. I do not intend now to ask or receive a support from you. I urge it to show that I feel that I have a right to it; that my conduct is not an argument that I am conscious I am not an apostle; and that I might urge it were there not strong reasons which determine me not to do it. I neither ask you to send me now a support, nor, if I visit you again, do I expect you will contribute to my maintenance."

For it were better for me to die ... - There are advantages growing out of my not urging this claim which are of more importance to me than life. Rather than forego these advantages, it would be better for me - it would be a thing which I would prefer - to pine in poverty and want; to be exposed to peril, and cold, and storms, until life should close. I esteem my "glorying,"the advantages of my course, to be of more value than life itself.

Than that any man should make my glorying void - His glorying, or boasting, or "joying,"as it may be more properly rendered τὸ καύχημά μου to kauchēma mou ; compare Phi 1:26; Heb 3:6), was:

\caps1 (1) t\caps0 hat he had preached the gospel without expense to anybody, and had thus prevented the charge of avarice 1Co 9:18; and,

\caps1 (2) t\caps0 hat he had been able to keep his body under, and pursue a course of self-denial that would result in his happiness and glory in heaven, 1Co 9:23-27. "Any man"would have made that "void,"if he had supported Paul; had prevented the necessity of his labor, and had thus exposed him to the charge of having preached the gospel for the sake of gain.

Poole: 1Co 9:1

1Co 9:1,2 Paul vindicateth his apostolical character,

1Co 9:3-14 and right to a maintenance from the churches,

1Co 9:15-18 though he relinquished that right for the

furtherance of the gospel, not content with

doing only his indispensable duty,

1Co 9:19-23 but voluntarily subjecting himself in many

points, where he was otherwise free, in order

thereby to win over more converts to Christ.

1Co 9:24,25 Those who contend for a corruptible crown use

much labour and abstinence.

1Co 9:26,27 So doth the apostle strive for one that is

incorruptible.

Chapter Introduction

In the greater part of this chapter, the apostle proceedeth in his former discourse, not speaking particularly to the case of eating meat offered to idols, but to the general point, viz. That it is our duty to abate of our liberty, when we see we cannot use it without harm to other Christians. And here he proposeth to them his own example, who had restrained himself in three things, to two of which he had a liberty, and yet avoided it, and that not to prevent their sinning, but only their suffering, and that, too, only by being by him over-burdened:

1. As to eating and drinking.

2. Abstaining from marriage, by which he might have been more chargeable to them.

3. Requiring maintenance of them for his labour amongst them. As to both which he declares he had from God’ s law a liberty, but had forborne to use that part from which the church in that state might be prejudiced.

Am I not an apostle? Some that are puffed up or seduced, will, it may be, deny that I am an apostle, a preacher of the gospel of the greatest eminency, immediately sent out by Christ to preach his gospel; but will any of you deny it?

Am I not free? Have I not the same liberty that any of you have in things wherein the law of God hath no more determined me than you? What charter of liberty hath God given to any of you more than he hath to me?

Have I not seen Jesus Christ? Did not I see Christ in my going to Damascus? Act 9:5 22:13,14 ; and when I was in my ecstasy, when I was rapt into the third heavens? 2Co 12:2-4 ; in prison? Act 23:11 . He was the only apostle we read of, who saw Christ after his ascension.

Are not ye my work in the Lord? If others will not look upon me as an apostle: God having wrought nothing upon their souls by my ministry, yet you, whose faith is my work, though in the Lord, as the principal efficient Cause, yet by me as God’ s instrument, cannot deny me to be so: if my having seen Jesus Christ, and being immediately sent out by him, be not enough to prove me so to you, yet the effects of my ministry upon you puts it past your denial.

Poole: 1Co 9:2

He had, 1Co 9:1 , told them they were his work in the Lord, from whence he concludes here, that he was an apostle, that is, one sent of Christ to them for the good of their souls, whatever he was to others. You, saith he, as to yourselves at least, are

the seal of my apostolical office; it hath a confirmation in you by the effect, as the writing is confirmed by the seal. For how can you think, that the blessing of the Lord should go along with my preaching, to turn you from pagan idolatry, and your lewd courses of life, to the true Christian religion, and to a holy life and conversation, if God had not send me. There is no such argument to prove a minister sent of Christ, as the success of his ministry in the conversion of souls unto God. It is true, we cannot conclude, that a minister is no true minister if he be able to produce no such seals of his calling; for the spiritual seed may for a time lie under the clods, and changes may be wrought in hearts, which are not published to the world; and even Isaiah may be sent to make the hearts of people fat. But where those seals can be produced, it is a most certain sign that the minister is a true minister, that is, one sent of God; for he could be no instrument to do such works if God were not with him; and if God had not sent him, he would not be with him so blessing his ministry. Yet it is possible the man may have his personal errors; for though some men doubt, whether an instance can be given of one openly and scandalously wicked, whom God ever honoured to be his instrument to convert souls, yet it would be rashly affirmed by any to say, that Judas (though a son of perdition, but not scandalous till the last) was an instrument to convert none.

Poole: 1Co 9:3

These words may be understood in a double reference: either to what went before; then the sense is this: To those that examine me about my apostleship, this is my answer; That I have seen the Lord, that you are my work in the Lord, and the seal of my ministry. Or with reference to the words that follow; then the sense is this: If any man examine me, how I myself practise the doctrine which I preach to others, and determine myself as to my liberty for the good and profit of others, I give them the following answer.

Poole: 1Co 9:4

Could I not eat and drink of such things offered to idols as well as you? Have not I as great a knowledge, and as much liberty? Yet, you see, I forbear. But the generality of interpreters rather incline to interpret it by what followeth: then, though it be here shortly expressed, and more fully opened afterward, yet the sense is: Have not I power to ask a maintenance of you, by which I should be enabled to eat and drink?

Poole: 1Co 9:5

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife? Those that by those terms, adelfhn, gunaika , understand, not (as we translate it) a sister, a wife, but a woman, that should out of her estate have contributed to the apostle’ s maintenance, (as Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod’ s steward, and Susanna, and many others, followed Christ, and ministered to him of their substance, Luk 8:3 ), seem not to consider:

1. That such women would have been no burden, but a help to the church (which is quite contrary to the apostle’ s sense).

2. That the term lead about, imports a conjugal relation to the woman.

3. That if this had been the sense, it had been enough to have said, to lead about a woman; he should not need have said, a sister, a woman.

4. That such leading about a woman, not their wife, had been scandalous.

5. That the very phrase, a sister, a wife, answers the phrase, Act 23:1 , Men, brethren, which signifies no more than, O ye Christian men; as a sister, a wife, signifies here a Christian wife.

6. That we no where read, that Peter, James, John, Judas, (here called the brethren of the Lord ), or any of the other apostles, ever in their travels carried about with them any such rich matrons, not their wives, who (as those, Luk 8:3 ) ministered to them of their substance. Our interpreters have therefore justly translated it, a sister, a wife; and the sense is: Have I not power to marry? Yet the phrase teaches us two things:

a) That Christians have no power, that is, no lawful power, to marry such as are no Christians, their wives must be their sisters also in Christ.

b) That husbands and wives ought to be undivided companions one to another.

As well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas: he instanceth in several apostles that were married, Peter, (called Cephas ), James, John, and Judas the son of Alpheus, Christ’ s kinsmen. Whence we may observe, that ministers may lawfully marry, no law of God hath restrained them more than others. The popish doctrine forbidding to marry, is by the apostle determined to be a doctrine of devils, 1Ti 4:1,3 .

Poole: 1Co 9:6

Are I and Barnabas the only apostles who are obliged for our livelihood to work with our hands? As Paul did, Act 18:3 , making tents. We certainly, as well as the rest of the apostles, if we would run out to the utmost end of the line of our liberty in things, without having any regard to the circumstances of our brethren, might forbear working with our hands, and expect that those amongst whom we labour should maintain us.

Poole: 1Co 9:7

Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? The work of the ministry is a warfare, the minister’ s work in that age was so in a more eminent manner, as the opposition to those first ministers of the gospel, both from the Jews and from the heathens, was greater than what ministers have in later ages met with. Now, saith the apostle, none that lists an army, expects that his soldiers should maintain themselves without any pay.

Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? It is like the planting of a vineyard. The church, in Scripture, is called a vineyard, Isa 5:1,2 . The plants are the Lord’ s, but he useth ministers’ hands in the planting of them: none planteth a vineyard, but in expectation of some fruit; none employeth servants to plant a vineyard, but he resolveth to uphold them with food and raiment, while they are in his work.

Or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? The church is compared to a flock: saith the apostle: No man feeds a flock, either personally, or by his servants, but he eateth, or alloweth his servants to eat, of the milk of the flock. By these three instances, commonly known amongst men, the apostle showeth the reasonableness, that the ministers of the gospel should be maintained by the people, to whom they are ministers.

Poole: 1Co 9:8

That is, I do not speak this only rationally, or by a fallible spirit, nor do I build this assertion alone upon instances known and familiar amongst men. As this is highly reasonable, and conformable to what the very light of nature showeth, and the law of nature obligeth men to in other cases, where men take others off their own work to attend theirs; so it is according to the will of God, which is the highest reason.

Poole: 1Co 9:9

Art being not so improved formerly as now, nor in all places as in some places; they were wont anciently, both in the land of Judea, and since in Greece, and (as is said) at this day in some places of France, to tread out their corn by the feet of oxen: and by the law of Moses, Deu 25:4 , it should seem that some too covetous persons would muzzle the mouths of their oxen, that while they trod out the corn, they might eat none of it; which God, looking upon as an act of cruelty or unmercifulness, forbade his ancient people the Jews. Now, saith the apostle:

Doth God take care for oxen? That is, more for oxen than for ministers or men? For God doth take care for oxen, he preserveth both man and beast; he takes care, as our Saviour elsewhere teacheth us, for the sparrows, for the fowls of the air, for the grass of the field, and therefore for oxen, which are a degree of creatures more noble: but by the same reason we must conclude, that he taketh a greater care for men, especially such as he employeth in his more immediate service.

Poole: 1Co 9:10

Not that the law, Deu 25:4 , did primarily reveal God’ s will for the maintenance of ministers; for undoubtedly it did primarily oblige them, according to the letter of it, not to deal cruelly and unmercifully with the beasts they made use of; but as they took them off from getting their food, by taking them up to tread out corn for them; so, while they did it, they should not starve them, but give thent leave moderately to eat of it. But (saith the apostle) the reason of it doth much more oblige with respect to men, especially such men as are employed in a ministry for your souls.

That he that plougheth should plough in hope that as he who plougheth for another, plougheth in hope to get bread for himself, from the wages for which he covenanteth;

and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope: and so also doth the thresher thresh in hope: so we that are the Lord’ s ploughmen, working together with him (though in a far inferior degree of causation) in the ploughing up the fallow grounds of men’ s hearts, and sowing the seed of righteousness in men’ s souls; and the Lord’ s threshers, by our labours, exhortations, arguments, &c., beating the fruits of good works, to the glory of God, out of those amongst whom we labour; might also labour in some hope of a livelihood for ourselves, while we are doing the Lord’ s work and his people’ s.

Poole: 1Co 9:11

By spiritual things the apostle meaneth the doctrine and sacraments of the gospel; which are called spiritual things, because they come from heaven, they affect the soul and spirit of a man, they tend to make men spiritual, they prepare the soul for heaven. By carnal things he means things which only serve our bodies, which are our carnal, fleshly part. From the inequality of these things, and the excellency of the former above the latter, the apostle argueth the reasonableness of ministers’ maintenance from their people, they giving them quid pro quo, a just compensation for such allowance, yea, what was of much more value; for there is a great disproportion between things spiritual and things carnal, the former much excelling the latter: so as the minister of the gospel had the odds of them, giving people things of a much greater and more excellent value, for things of a much less and inferior value.

Poole: 1Co 9:12

If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Those false apostles or teachers, which were amongst the Corinthians, did (as it seemeth) exercise this power, that is, required maintenance of the people; saith the apostle: Are not we by the same right possessed of such a power? Might not we as reasonably expect such a maintenance?

Objection. But might not they have said: No, you are not; they are constantly residing amongst us, and instructing us, &c.?

Answer. This arguing of the apostle lets us know, that the primitive churches were not only obliged to maintain their own pastors, but those also who were general officers to the church, and by the appointment of God were not to fix and abide in any one place, but had the care of all the churches upon them. And it may also teach us, that though Christians be in the first place obliged to take care of their own pastors, yet they are not to limit their charity to them, but also to take what care their ability will allow them of others, whose labours have at any time been useful to them, or may be useful to any other part of the church of God.

Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ: Yet, saith the apostle, though we have this power or liberty, neither I nor Barnabas have made use of it, but suffer all those evils that come upon our not using it, hunger, thirst, labour, lest we should hinder the progress of the gospel, while some might for the charge decline hearing us, or others might charge us with covetousness, &c.

Poole: 1Co 9:13

You may understand what is the mind and will of God under the New Testament, by reflecting upon what appeareth to you to have been his mind and will under the Old Testament: God had a ministry under the Old Testament, the tribe of Levi was it; and God there ordained and appointed a livelihood for them, Num 18:20 Deu 10:9 18:1 , so as they needed not (as other men) to labour with their hands to get bread to eat.

Poole: 1Co 9:14

God’ s will is the same under the New Testament that it was under the Old; it is not as to the people a matter of liberty, so as men may choose whether they will maintain their ministers or not, there is an ordinance of God in the case: it is the will of God, that those who are taken off from worldly employments, and spend their time in the study and preaching of the gospel, should have a livelihood from their labour.

Poole: 1Co 9:15

Though I have such a liberty to marry as well as others, and a liberty to demand a maintenance of those to whom I preach the gospel, yet I have done neither. Nor do I now write to that purpose, that I would now impose a burden upon you to raise me a maintenance. I know I am calumniated by some, as if by preaching the gospel I only sought my own profit and advantage: I have gloried in the contrary, Act 20:33,34 ; so 1Co 9:18 ; and I look upon it as my great honour, that I can preach the gospel freely, and I had rather die by starving than lose this advantage of glorying. And if I for your profit, and for the advantage of the gospel, abate of my liberty, should not you abate of yours, to keep your weak brethren from destroying their souls by sinning against God?

Haydock: 1Co 9:1

Am not I free? The apostle in this place wishes to teach the Corinthians, how careful and solicitous they should be not to give cause for scandal to their neighbour, and how anxious for his spiritual welfare, informing them, that as he refused to take even what he had a just right to, as a minister of the altar, that is to live by the altar, so they must do in like manner, abstaining even from things lawful, for the good of religion. (Estius) ---

Am not I an apostle? &c. St. Paul here, to the 20th verse, answers those reflections, which the new preachers at Corinth made against him and Barnabas, as if they were only an inferior kind of apostles. To this he answers, that he had seen Jesus Christ, who appeared to him. He tells the Corinthians, that they at least, ought to respect him as their apostle, who had converted them. He tells them, that when any persons ask about his apostleship, he has this to say for himself, that he not only laboured as an apostle in converting them, but also laboured without taking of them what might supply him and his companions with necessaries, as to meat and drink. He insists upon this particular circumstance, to shew he did not preach Christ for gain-sake; and at the same time brings seven or eight proofs to shew that he, and all who preach the gospel, have a power and a right to be maintained with necessaries by them to whom the preach. 1. He had a title to be supplied with necessaries, as being an apostle. 2. And by them, as being their apostle. 3. By the example of a soldier, who has a right to be paid: of a husbandman, who has a right to partake of the fruit of his labours: of a shepherd, nourished by the milk of the flock. (ver. 7) 4. He brings the example of those who threshed, or trode out the corn by oxen, as it was formerly the custom, that the threshers, nay even the oxen, when treading out the corn, were not to be muzzled according to the Scripture, (Deuteronomy xxv.) but were to eat, and to be fed with the corn or straw; much more men that labour, are to be fed with the fruit of their labours. (ver. 8. 9. 10.) 5. Nothing is more reasonable that to supply those with corporal and temporal things, who labour to procure spiritual and eternal blessings for others. (ver. 11.) 6. They who preached to the Corinthians after St. Paul, were maintained by them; had not he and Barnabas as much right as they? (ver. 12.) 7. He shews it by the examples of the ministers and priests in the law of Moses, who had a share of the sacrifices and victims offered, and who, serving the altar, lived by the altar. (ver. 13.) 8. He brings the authority of our Saviour Christ, who said to his apostles, (Matthew x. 10.) that a labourer is worthy of his meat, or of his reward, as it is said, Luke x. 7. But St. Paul puts them in mind, (ver. 15.) that he did not make use of his right, as to any of these things: that he does not write in this manner, to get or have any thing of them hereafter: nay, he makes warm protestations, says St. John Chrysostom,[1] that he will take nothing of them; that he will preach without putting others to any cost; (ver. 18.) that he will accept of nothing, lest thereby he put any obstacle to the gospel, or gave any person occasion to say he preached for gain. He tells them, it is better for him to die, than, by taking any thing of them, to make void this, which he has to glory in, and to justify himself against his backbiting adversaries: the sense is, that he is willing to spend his life as well as his labours among them, sooner than in these circumstances receive any temporal reward from them. Yet when the circumstances were different, he received of the Philippians (Philippians iv. 15.) enough to supply him in his necessities. He also tells them here, that he does not pretend to glory of boast for having preached: this being a necessary duty. ---

For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward. The sense seems to be, if I do this office cheerfully, and with a right intention to please God only, I shall have a copious reward prepared for such a labourer: if unwillingly, and imperfectly, and not with a pure intention, I cannot expect such a reward; though still a dispensing of it is entrusted to me; that is, it is always my duty to preach. Others, by willingly, understand the doing of it in so perfect a manner, as not to receive any thing, and unwillingly, when they would scarce do it, at least so zealously, unless they received what would maintain them. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

St. John Chrysostom, Greek: om kb, p. 382. Greek: meta sphodrotatos arneitai.

Haydock: 1Co 9:5

It appears certain, from the testimony of the fathers, that St. Paul was not in the state of wedlock. St. Jerome informs us that the apostle is here speaking of such holy women who, according to the Jewish custom, supplied their teachers with the necessaries of life, as we see was done to Christ himself. It is evident from ancient records that this was a very prevalent custom in Judea, and therefore a cause of no scandal; but to the Gentiles this custom was unknown, and therefore lest it might prove a cause of scandal to any, St. Paul did not allow any woman to follow him as a companion. Tertullian denies, with St. Augustine and St. Jerome, that St. Paul is here speaking of his wife. (Estius; Calmet) ---

A woman, a sister. [2] Some erroneous translators have corrupted this text, by rendering it, a sister, a wife; whereas it is certain, St. Paul had no wife, (chap. vii. ver. 7. 8.) and that he only speaks of such devout women, as according to the custom of the Jewish nation, waited upon the preachers of the gospel, and supplied them with necessaries. (Challoner) ---

And to what end could he talk of burthening the Corinthians with providing for his wife, when he himself clearly affirmeth that he was single? (Chap. vii. v. 7. and 8.) This all the Greek fathers affirm, with St. Augustine, do op. Monach. chap. iv.; St. Jerome, adv. Jovin. chap. xiv. &c. &c. [Also see annotations on ver. 25, below]

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Mulierem sororem, Greek: adelphen gunaika. Sororem mulierem, where Estius brings examples to shew that it is the same sense and construction, whether we read mulierem sororem, or sororem mulierem. Tertullian, the most ancient of the Latin fathers, read: mulieres circumducendi, not uxores. De pudicitia, chap. xiv. p. 566. Ed. Rig. and lib. de monogam. chap. viii. p. 519. he first says, Petrum solum invenio maritum. And on this place, non uxores demonstrat ab Apostolis circumductas....sed simpliciter mulieres, quæ, illos eodem instituto, quo et Dominum comitantes, ministrabant. St. Jerome. Ubi de mulieribus sororibus infertur, perspicuum est, non uxores debere intelligi, sed eas, ut diximus, quæ de sua substantia ministrabant. St. Augustine. Hoc quidam non intelligentes, non sororem mulierem, sed uxorem interpretati sunt, fefellit illos verbi græci ambiguitas....quanquam hoc ita posuerit, ut falli non debuerint, quia neque mulierem tantummodo ait, sed sororem mulierem, neque ducendi, sed circumducendi: verum alios Interpretes non fefellit hæc ambiguitas, et mulierem, non uxorem interpretati sunt.

====================

Haydock: 1Co 9:11

Is it a great matter? The apostle is here speaking of what he had given to the Corinthians, and what he had received from them; and this he does under the comparison of the sower and the reaper. Can any of you think it hared that we receive some part of your temporal goods, when we have bestowed upon you spiritual: nevertheless, we have not used this power, but we bear all things, &c. (ver. 12.) (Estius)

Gill: 1Co 9:1

Am I not an apostle? am I not free?.... The Syriac, Ethiopic, and Vulgate Latin versions, put the last clause first; so the Alexandrian copy, and some other copies; and many interpreters are of opinion that it is the best order of the words; the apostle proceeding by a gradation from the less to the greater, having respect either to his freedom in the use of things indifferent, as eating of meats, &c. for though he did not think fit to use his liberty, to the wounding of weak consciences, it did not follow therefore that he was not free, as some might suggest from what he had said in the latter part of the foregoing chapter: or he may have respect to his freedom from the ceremonial law in general; for though, for the sake of gaining souls to Christ, he became all things to all men; to the Jews he became a Jew, that he might gain them; yet in such a manner as to preserve his liberty in Christ, without entangling himself with the yoke of bondage. Some have thought he intends, by his liberty, his right to insist upon a maintenance, and that he was no more obliged to work with his hands than other persons, of which he treats at large hereafter; but to me it rather seems that the words stand in their right order; and that, whereas there were some persons that either denied him to be an apostle, or at least insinuated that he was not one, nor was he to be treated as such, he goes upon the proof of it; and the first thing he mentions is his freedom, that is, from men; no man had any authority over him; he was not taught, nor sent forth, nor ordained by men as a minister, but immediately by Jesus Christ, as apostles were; they were set in the first place in the church, and had power to instruct, send forth, and ordain others; but none had power over them; and this being the apostle's case, proved him to be one; he was an apostle, because he was free:

have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? He had a spiritual sight of him by faith, but that did not show him to be an apostle; this is what he had in common with other believers: whether he saw him in the flesh, before his crucifixion and death, is not certain; it is very probable he might; yet this was no more than what Herod and Pontius Pilate did; but he saw him after his resurrection from the dead, to which he refers, 1Co 15:8 and designs here, as a proof of his apostleship, this being what the apostles were chosen to be eyewitnesses of, Act 10:41 and publish to the world: now our apostle saw him several times; first at the time of his conversion, next when in a trance at Jerusalem, and again in the castle where the chief captain put him for security, and very probably also when he was caught up into the third heaven:

are not you my work in the Lord? as they were regenerated, converted persons, and were become new creatures; not efficiently, but instrumentally; they were God's workmanship, as he was the efficient cause of their conversion and faith; his only, as an instrument by whom they believed; and therefore he adds, "in the Lord"; ascribing the whole to his power and grace: however, as he had been the happy instrument of first preaching the Gospel to them, and of begetting them again through it; of founding and raising such a large flourishing church as they were; it was no inconsiderable proof of his apostleship.

Gill: 1Co 9:2

If I be not an apostle unto others,.... This is said by way of supposition, not concession; for he was an apostle to many others; he was an apostle of the Gentiles in general; as the apostleship of the circumcision belonged to Peter, that of the uncircumcision fell to his share: but however, as if he should say, be that as it will,

yet doubtless I am to you; all the signs of apostleship were wrought among them; not only the grace of God was implanted in them under his ministry, but the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit were received by them through it; and many signs, wonders, and mighty deeds, were done in the midst of them by him: see 2Co 12:12 which were sufficient to put the matter quite out of doubt with them:

for the seal of mine apostleship, are ye in the Lord; alluding to the sealing of deeds and writings, which render them authentic; or to the sealing of letters, confirming the truth of what is therein expressed; and the sense is, that their being converted persons, and so openly in the Lord, in union with him; or being made new creatures by the power of his grace, through his preaching, was an authentic proof of his apostleship, and served him instead of a letter testimonial and recommendatory; see 2Co 3:1. Some copies read, "the seal of my epistle", and so the Ethiopic version.

Gill: 1Co 9:3

Mine answer to them that do examine me is this. These words are referred by some to the following, as if the apostle's answer lay in putting the questions he does in the next verses; but they rather seem to belong to the preceding, and the meaning to be this, that when any persons called in question his apostleship, and examined him upon that head, what he thought fit to say in answer to them, and in defence of himself, was by referring them to the famous church at Corinth, who were as particular persons, and as a church, his work in the Lord, and everyone of them as so many seals of his apostleship; he being the first preacher of the Gospel to them, the founder of them as a church, and the instrument of their conversion.

Gill: 1Co 9:4

Have we not power to eat and to drink? Having proved his apostleship, he proceeds to establish his right to a maintenance as a Gospel minister; which he expresses by various phrases, and confirms by divers arguments: by a "power to eat and drink", he does not mean the common power and right of mankind to perform such actions, which everyone has, provided he acts temperately, and to the glory of God; nor a liberty of eating and drinking things indifferent, or which were prohibited under the ceremonial law; but a comfortable livelihood at the public charge, or at the expense of the persons to whom he ministered; and he seems to have in view the words of Christ, Luk 10:7.

Gill: 1Co 9:5

Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife,.... The phrase "a sister, a wife", is an Hebraism, and answers to אחתיכלה, "my sister, spouse", Son 4:9. The Jews called their wives, sisters, not on account of religion, which also is not the meaning here; but because of the common relation that men and women, all mankind, stand in to one another, antecedent to any nearer relation, as that of man and wife. The sense the Papists put on these words, to secure them from being a proof of the lawfulness of the marriage of the ministers of the Gospel, can by no means be the true one; which is, that they are to be understood of a rich woman, or women, the apostles had a power to carry about with them, to minister of their substance to them, and provide for them; for such a sense is directly contrary to the subject and argument the apostle is upon; which is to show the right that he and others had, of casting themselves entirely upon the churches for a maintenance; whereas this is contriving a way for relieving the churches of such a charge; besides, the act of "leading", or carrying "about", is expressive of such a power over them, as cannot be thought to agree with persons of such substance; and whose voluntary act this must be, to go along with them and supply them; add to this, that for the apostles to lead about with them wherever they went women, whether rich or poor, that were not their wives, would be of no good report, and must tend to hurt their character and reputation: moreover, though these words clearly imply the lawfulness of a minister's marriage, and suppose it, yet they do not express the act itself, or the lawfulness of entering into such a state, but rather what follows after it; and the sense is this, that the apostle and others, supposing them to have wives, and it may be added also, and children, they had a right to take these with them wherever they went, and insist upon the maintenance of them, as well as of their own, at the public expense:

as well as other apostles; who it seems did so, that had wives and families, as Philip the Evangelist had four daughters, Act 21:8.

And as the brethren of the Lord: who it seems were married persons, and took such a method; by whom are meant James, Joses, Judas, and Simon; who were the near kinsmen of Christ, it being usual with the Jews to call such brethren:

and Cephas; that is, Peter, who it is certain had a wife; see Mat 8:14 and therefore it is with a very ill grace that the pope, who pretends to be Peter's successor, should forbid the marriage of ecclesiastical persons.

Gill: 1Co 9:6

Or I only and Barnabas,.... Who were for a great while companions and fellow travellers; are we alone? are we exempted from those rights and privileges, common to others?

have not we power to forbear working? that is, with their hands, at their trades and occupations, to get their living by: Paul worked at his trade, and so it seems Barnabas did likewise: Paul wrought with his hands at Corinth, in company with Aquila and Priscilla, they being tentmakers as he, Act 18:3 and so he did in other places; he appeals for the truth of this to the elders of the church at Ephesus, Act 20:34 and to the church of the Thessalonians, 1Th 2:9 not but that he had a right and power to leave off business, to forbear working, and require a maintenance from those to whom he ministered; but for some reasons he chose not to make use of this his power and liberty, because he would not be chargeable to them; and lest that upon his first preaching the Gospel to them, they should think he had worldly selfish ends in view, and not the good of souls, and glory of Christ; however, he hereby lets them know, that though Barnabas and he continued to get their bread by their own hand labour, they had a right to quit their trades, and throw themselves upon them for a maintenance. The apostle seems, in this, to imitate the ancient, wise, and holy men of his nation, who taught the law freely, and took nothing for it; not that they thought it was unlawful, or that they had no right to a maintenance on account of it, but for the honour of religion, and that piety they professed; and lest the law should be thought to be made a trade of, they chose not to insist upon it ^d.

Gill: 1Co 9:7

Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges?.... Some people have done so, as did the Habessines ^e, and the ancient Romans ^f; though before the apostle wrote this, the senate had made an act, that the soldiers should have a stipend from the public; and this being now so common, and universally obtaining everywhere, the apostle puts the question he does; and his meaning is, that since ministers of the Gospel are the good soldiers of Jesus Christ, and are engaged in a warfare state, in fighting the good fight of faith, against his enemies, and those of his church, it is but reasonable that their charges should be bore, and they maintained at the public expense:

who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? The church of Christ is a vineyard, it is often so called in Scripture; ministers are planters, vinedressers, and labourers in it; and as the mystical Solomon, the owner of the vineyard, ought to have his thousand, the cultivators of it, the keepers of the fruit, should have their two hundred, Son 8:12

Or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? The churches of Christ are compared to flocks of sheep; the ministers of the word are pastors, or shepherds, who have the care and oversight of them, and feed them with knowledge and understanding; and it is but right and just that they enjoy the fruit of their labours, and have a proper and suitable maintenance, as it is that he who feeds a flock should eat of the milk which that produces.

Gill: 1Co 9:8

Say I these things as a man?.... After the manner of men, reasoning from things common among men, and obvious to everyone's observation:

or saith not the law the same also? As the subject the apostle is upon was capable of being illustrated and confirmed by instances common unto, and easy of observation among men; so it might be supported by divine authority; it was not only a clear point from the reason of things, but was certain by the law of God.

Gill: 1Co 9:9

For it is written in the law of Moses,.... Deu 25:4

Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. The manner of threshing, or beating out the corn among the Jews, was not the same with ours; it was not done by the flail, at least not always, but by the means of oxen; and by these not only treading upon it to and fro, but drawing a wooden instrument after them, the bottom of which was stuck with iron teeth, and the top of it filled with stones, to press it down close by the weight thereof; the sheaves put in proper form, the oxen were led to and fro upon them, drawing this threshing instrument after them, by which means the grain was separated from the husk and ear ^g; see Isa 41:15 The learned Beckius ^h has given us a figure of this instrument, and the manner of using it: now according to this law, whilst the ox was thus employed, its mouth was not to be muzzled, but it might freely eat of the corn it trod upon, excepting, the Jews say ⁱ, what was dedicated to sacred uses. They give many rules relating to this law, and particularly observe, that it is to be extended to all sorts of creatures, as well as the ox, and to all sorts of business ^k; and that what is said of the ox, is much more to be observed with respect to men ^l; and which agrees with the apostle's reasoning here:

doth God take care for oxen? yes, he does, and for creatures of less importance than they, even the fowls of the air, and the most worthless of them, sparrows, two of which are sold for a farthing; but not for them only, nor principally, but chiefly for men.

Gill: 1Co 9:10

Or saith he it altogether for our sakes,.... That is, God says this, or delivers out this law, forbidding the muzzling the ox, while it treads out the corn; not merely for the sake of the ox, but chiefly for the sake of men; and so Jarchi upon the place says, that the ox is mentioned, להוציא את אדם, "to express man"; and so another of the Jewish writers ^m interprets the law in Deu 22:6. "Thou shalt not take the dam with the young";

"the intention of the command is, not to have mercy on birds, "but for the sake of men", he (God) says this, whom he would accustom to meekness and compassion:''

and particularly this is here said, for the sake of ministers of the Gospel, who for their spiritual strength, and labours in their work, may be compared to oxen; see Eze 1:10. This law is elsewhere produced by the apostle, and urged in favour of the maintenance of ministers, as here, 1Ti 5:17 and therefore

for our sakes no doubt it is written; to teach men, that as any workmen are not to be deprived of proper sustenance, so neither they that labour in the word and doctrine:

that he that ploweth should plow in hope; of enjoying the fruit of his labours:

and that he that thresheth in hope, should be partaker of his hope; of having a supply out of that he is threshing.

Gill: 1Co 9:11

If we have sown unto you spiritual things,.... The preachers of the Gospel are compared to sowers of seed; the seed they sow is the word of God, which is like to seed, for its smallness and despicableness in the eyes of carnal men; and yet as the seed is the choicest which is laid by for sowing, the Gospel is most choice and excellent to true believers; like seed, it has a generative virtue through divine influence; and whereas unless sown into the earth, it brings forth no fruit, so neither does the word, unless it has a place in the heart, where, as seed in the ground, its operation is secret, its increase gradual, and its fruitfulness different. The ground they sow upon is, very various; some of their hearers are like the wayside, careless, ignorant, and on whom no impression is made; others are like the stony ground, who though for a while they express some affection and liking, yet not having the root of grace in them, whenever persecution arises, forsake the hearing of it; others are like the thorny ground, which are at first very promising, and greatly reformed, but inwardly full of the cares and lusts of the world, which choke the word, and make it unfruitful; and others are like the good ground, who are made good by the grace of God, understand the word, receive it, hold it fast, and in whom it is fruitful: sowing requires skill and art, and so preaching the Gospel does, and that more than human; and is constantly in its returning season to be attended to, notwithstanding the winds and clouds, and so the ministry of the word, notwithstanding all reproaches, persecutions, and afflictions; and as the same sort of seed, without mixture, and in plenty, is to be cast into the earth, so the same pure and unmixed Gospel of Christ is to be preached, and that without keeping back any thing that is profitable: and once more, as the sower, when he has cast his seed into the earth, waits long and with patience for its springing up and increase, so do the faithful dispensers of the Gospel: and what they sow or minister is of a spiritual nature; it comes from the Spirit of God, he is the dictator of it; he by his gifts qualifies men to preach it, and by his power makes it effectual to the souls of men; and through it conveys himself to them, as a spirit of regeneration and sanctification: the matter of the Gospel is spiritual; it contains spiritual doctrines, such as justification, pardon of sin, adoption, regeneration, &c. and are what concern the souls and spirits of men, and their spiritual and eternal welfare:

is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? meaning temporal ones, what concern the flesh, the body, the outward man, and the support thereof. The argument is from the greater to the less, and much the same with that in Rom 15:27. The difference between carnal and spiritual things is very great; the one has a vastly superior excellency to the other; and therefore if for carnal things men receive spiritual ones, they can be no losers thereby, but must be gainers; nor should it be thought any hardship or burden upon them, or any great and wonderful thing done by them, to support and maintain such who are so useful to their souls, and the spiritual welfare of them.

Gill: 1Co 9:12

If others are partakers of this power over you,.... Meaning not any tyrannical power and jurisdiction over them, with respect either to faith or practice; but the right of a maintenance, which either the false apostles, or the true ordinary ministers of the word there, justly claimed, and did enjoy:

are not we rather? he and Barnabas, especially himself, who was more than an ordinary minister, an apostle, and the first preacher of the Gospel to them:

nevertheless, we have not used this power; though others had, and they had a right to it, but did not choose to insist upon it; and, rather than do so, worked with their own hands; their not making use of this power was not because they stood in no need of it, and enjoyed an affluence of temporal things, for the reverse of this was their case:

but suffer all things: famine, thirst, nakedness, hard labour, and many other hardships:

lest we should hinder the Gospel of Christ; some might suggest, that they preached the Gospel only for gain, and not for the good of souls, and glory of Christ; and other mean spirited persons might be backward of embracing and professing the Gospel, lest it should become chargeable to them; wherefore that the Gospel might not be retarded in its course by the calumny of some, and the sordidness of others, the apostle thought fit to drop his claim to a maintenance from them; though at the same time he would have them know it was a just due, and therefore goes on to defend it by other arguments.

Gill: 1Co 9:13

Do ye not know, that they which minister about holy things,.... Not the priests in the temples of the Heathen deities, as the Ethiopic version suggests; but the priests in the temple at Jerusalem, who were employed in slaying the sacrifices, taking off their skins, cutting them into pieces, laying them in order with the wood upon the altar, and burning them, with other services they there performed, which were well known to the Corinthians, many of this church being Jews:

live of the things of the temple; the tithes and firstfruits, and other oblations, and presents in money or goods, thither brought; nor had they any other way of living and supporting their families; for the priests and Levites had no inheritance among the children of Israel, and therefore provision was made for them in this way:

and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar; some read it, "who sit at the altar"; but none might sit in the temple but a king of the house of David ⁿ; the priests and Levites always stood in their ministry, some doing one thing, and some another; some slew the sacrifice, others sprinkled the blood; some took away the ashes, others laid the wood, others brought up the parts of the sacrifice when slain, skinned, and cut asunder, and laid them on the altar ^o, and these partook with the altar; some parts the altar devoured, being consumed by fire upon it; but then there were other pieces which by law were reserved for the priests, and upon which they and their families lived: hence the distinction of אכילת מזבח, the food of the altar, and אכילת אדם, "the food of man" ^p; and therefore as it was but just and equitable that persons so employed should be maintained out of the revenues of the temple and altar, it is but right that Gospel ministers should be provided for with a suitable maintenance.

Gill: 1Co 9:14

Even so hath the Lord ordained,.... That is, the Lord Jesus Christ, in Mat 10:10 it is an order and appointment of his that his ministering servants, who labour in preaching his Gospel, should be sufficiently taken care of, as to a comfortable livelihood; he has not indeed fixed it in the same way as the priests and Levites had theirs under the law; but as the one was just and right, that they should be maintained out of the things belonging to the temple and altar, and live on them, so it is his will and pleasure,

that they which preach the Gospel; that continue to do so, that labour, and not loiter in the word and doctrine, who do the work of the ministry fully and faithfully, and not bear the name only of Gospel preachers: should live of the Gospel; not the Gospel itself, which is spiritual, and not corporeal food; but the sense is, that in consideration and because of their preaching the Gospel, they should be supplied with the proper necessaries of life: the learned Mr. Mede has proved, by various instances, that the word ευαγγελιον, here rendered "Gospel", and which signifies good news and glad tidings, is in other writers used for a reward, given to such that bring good tidings; and has rightly observed, that the Hebrew word בשרה, which signifies the same, is used in a like sense in 2Sa 4:10 and accordingly the sense here will be, that it is the ordination of Christ, that such who faithfully bring the news and glad tidings of salvation to sinners, should, as a reward for such good news, be provided for with a comfortable maintenance, on which they should live.

Gill: 1Co 9:15

But I have used none of these things,.... Either none of these arguments or reasons, for a minister's maintenance, taken from the reason of things, the law of Moses, the examples of the priests and Levites, and the order and appointment of Christ, in favour of himself, and that he might be provided for by them accordingly; or none of the things he had a right to do as other apostles, as to eat and drink at the public expense, to lead about with him a sister, a wife, had he any, and to forbear working with his own hands:

neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me; it was not on his own account that he gave these strong reasons, urged these instances, and so undeniably proved this point, that ministers should be maintained by the people; and this he says to prevent what some might be ready enough to suggest, that though the apostle had as yet took nothing of the church at Corinth, it was plain, that for the time to come, he meant to do it; and therefore had written these things with such a view, to make way for his after supply from them. This he denies, and gives his reason for it,

for it were better for me to die; through want, with famine, could he be supplied no other way, than to take the least farthing of them:

or than that any man should make my glorying void; meaning not so much his inward pleasure, joy, and satisfaction in preaching the Gospel freely, it being more blessed to give than to receive; but his boasting or glorying, not before God, but against the false apostles; that he had never taken anything of the church at Corinth for preaching, nor never would, when they had insinuated he preached for gain, and by artful methods had got their money, and drained their purses.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 1Co 9:2

¹ tn Grk “the seal.”

NET Notes: 1Co 9:4

¹ tn Grk “the right to eat and drink.” In the context this is a figurative reference to financial support.

NET Notes: 1Co 9:8

¹ tn Or “only according to human authority”; Grk “saying these things according to men.”

NET Notes: 1Co 9:9

¹ sn A quotation from Deut 25:4.

NET Notes: 1Co 9:13

¹ tn Grk “working the sacred things.”

NET Notes: 1Co 9:15

¹ tn Grk “so that it will happen in this way in my case.”

² tc The reading ἤ – τὸ καύχημά μου οὐδεὶς κενώσει (h – to kauchma mou oudei" kenwsei, “than – no one will deprive me of my reason for boasting!”) is syntactically abrupt, but fully in keeping with Pauline style. It is supported by Ì⁴⁶ א* B D*^,c 33 1739 1881 as well as early patristic authors. Most witnesses, especially the later ones (א² C D² Ψ Ï lat), have a significantly smoother reading than this: ἢ τὸ καύχημά μου ἵνα τις κενώσῃ (or κενώσει); h to kauchma mou {ina ti" kenwsh (or kenwsei), “than that anyone should deprive me of my boasting.” The simple replacement of οὐδείς with ἵνα essentially accomplishes the smoothing out of the text, and as such the ἵνα reading is suspect. Not only is the harder reading in keeping with Pauline style, but it is also found in the earlier and better witnesses.

sn Paul breaks off his thought at mid-sentence (indicated by the dash in the translation) and it is somewhat difficult to determine his reason for boasting. Most likely Paul would rather die than be deprived of the boast that he had offered the gospel free of charge even though as an apostle he had the right to such support (9:14). Did he say this as a way of criticizing his opponents? Perhaps only indirectly. His focus has more to do with not hindering the gospel than what his opponents were doing (9:12).

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:1

Am ^{( 1 )} I not an apostle? am I not free? ^{( 2 )} have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye ^{( a )} my work in the Lord?

^{( 1 )} Before he proceeds any further in his purposed matter of things offered to idols, he would show the cause of all this evil, and also take it away. That is, that the Corinthians thought that they did not have to depart from the least amount of their liberty for any man's pleasure. Therefore he propounds himself for an example, and that in a matter almost necessary. And yet he speaks of both, but first of his own person. If (he says) you allege for yourselves that you are free, and therefore will use your liberty, am I not also free, seeing I am an apostle? ^{( 2 )} He proves his apostleship by the effects, in that he was appointed by Christ himself, and the authority of his function was sufficiently confirmed to him among them by their conversion. And all these things he sets before their eyes, to make them ashamed because they would not in the least way that might be, debase themselves for the sake of the weak, whereas the apostle himself did all the he could to win them to God, when they were utterly reprobate and without God.

^{( a )} By the Lord.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:2

If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the ^{( b )} seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.

^{( b )} As a seal by which it sufficiently appears that God is the author of my apostleship.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:3

^{( 3 )} Mine answer to them that do ^{( c )} examine me is this,

^{( 3 )} He adds this by the way, as if he should say, "So far it is off, that you may doubt of my apostleship, that I use it to refute those who call it into controversy, by opposing those things which the Lord has done by me among you."

^{( c )} Which like judges examine me and my doings.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:4

^{( 4 )} Have we not power to ^{( d )} eat and to drink?

^{( 4 )} "Now concerning the matter itself", he says, "seeing that I am free, and truly an apostle, why may not I (I say not, eat of all things offered to idols) be maintained by my labours, indeed and keep my wife also, as the rest of the apostles lawfully do, as by name, John and James, the Lord's cousins, and Peter himself?"

^{( d )} Upon the expense of the Church?

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:5

Have we not power to lead about a ^{( e )} sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and [as] the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

^{( e )} One that is a Christian and a true believer.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:6

Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to ^{( f )} forbear working?

^{( f )} Not live by the works of our hands.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:7

^{( 5 )} Who ^{( g )} goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?

^{( 5 )} That he may not seem to burden the apostles, he shows that it is just that they do, by an argument of comparison, seeing that soldiers live by their wages, and husbandmen by the fruits of their labours, and shepherds by that which comes of their flocks.

^{( g )} Goes to warfare?

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:8

^{( 6 )} Say I these things ^{( h )} as a man? or saith not the law the same also?

^{( 6 )} Secondly, he brings forth the authority of God's institution by an argument of comparison.

^{( h )} Have I not better ground than the common custom of men?

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:9

For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for ^{( i )} oxen?

^{( i )} Was it God's proper intention to provide for oxen, when he made this law? For there is not the smallest thing in the world, but that God has a concern for.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:11

^{( 7 )} If we have sown unto you spiritual things, [is it] a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

^{( 7 )} An assumption of the arguments with an amplification, for neither in so doing do we require a reward appropriate for our work.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:12

^{( 8 )} If others be partakers of [this] ^{( k )} power over you, [are] not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.

^{( 8 )} Another argument of great force: others are nourished among you, therefore it was lawful for me, indeed rather for me than any other. And yet I refused it, and had rather still suffer any inconvenience, than the Gospel of Christ should be hindered.

^{( k )} The word signifies right and interest, by which he shows us that the ministers of the word must by right and duty be supported by the Church.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:13

^{( 9 )} Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live [of the ^{( l )} things] of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are ^{( m )} partakers with the altar?

^{( 9 )} Last of all he brings forth the express law concerning the nourishing of the Levites, which privilege nonetheless he will not use.

^{( l )} This is spoken by the figure of speech metonymy, for those things that are offered in the temple.

^{( m )} Are partakers with the altar in dividing the sacrifice.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:14

Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live ^{( n )} of the gospel.

^{( n )} Because they preach the Gospel. It follows by this place, that Paul received no living, neither would have any other man receive, by a commodity of masses, or any other such superstitious nonsense.

Geneva Bible: 1Co 9:15

But I have used none of these things: ^{( 10 )} neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for [it were] better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.

^{( 10 )} He takes away occasion of suspicion by the way, that it might not be thought that he wrote this as though he was demanding his wages that were not payed him. On the contrary, he says, I had rather die, than not to continue in this purpose to preach the Gospel freely. For I am bound to preach the Gospel, seeing that the Lord has given and commanded me this office: but unless I do it willingly and for the love of God, nothing that I do is to be considered worthwhile. If I had rather that the Gospel should be evil spoken of, than that I should not require my wages, then would it appear that I took these pains not so much for the Gospel's sake, as for my gains and advantages. But I say, this would not be to use, but rather to abuse my right and liberty: therefore not only in this thing, but also in all others (as much as I could) I am made all things to all men, that I might win them to Christ, and might together with them be won to Christ.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 1Co 9:1-27

1 He shows his liberty;

7 and that the minister ought to live by the Gospel;

15 yet that himself has of his own accord abstained,

18 to be either chargeable unto them,

22 or offensive unto any, in matters indifferent.

24 Our life is like unto a race.

MHCC: 1Co 9:1-14

It is not new for a minister to meet with unkind returns for good-will to a people, and diligent and successful services among them. To the cavils of some, the apostle answers, so as to set forth himself as an example of self-denial, for the good of others. He had a right to marry as well as other apostles, and to claim what was needful for his wife, and his children if he had any, from the churches, without labouring with his own hands to get it. Those who seek to do our souls good, should have food provided for them. But he renounced his right, rather than hinder his success by claiming it. It is the people's duty to maintain their minister. He may wave his right, as Paul did; but those transgress a precept of Christ, who deny or withhold due support.

MHCC: 1Co 9:15-23

It is the glory of a minister to deny himself, that he may serve Christ and save souls. But when a minister gives up his right for the sake of the gospel, he does more than his charge and office demands. By preaching the gospel, freely, the apostle showed that he acted from principles of zeal and love, and thus enjoyed much comfort and hope in his soul. And though he looked on the ceremonial law as a yoke taken off by Christ, yet he submitted to it, that he might work upon the Jews, do away their prejudices, prevail with them to hear the gospel, and win them over to Christ. Though he would transgress no laws of Christ, to please any man, yet he would accommodate himself to all men, where he might do it lawfully, to gain some. Doing good was the study and business of his life; and, that he might reach this end, he did not stand on privileges. We must carefully watch against extremes, and against relying on any thing but trust in Christ alone. We must not allow errors or faults, so as to hurt others, or disgrace the gospel.

Matthew Henry: 1Co 9:1-2

Blessed Paul, in the work of his ministry, not only met with opposition from those without, but discouragement from those within. He was under reproach; false brethren questioned his apostleship, and were very industrious to lessen his character and sink his reputation; particularly here at Corinth, a place to which he had been instrumental in doing much good, and from which he had deserved well; and yet there were those among them who upon these heads created him great uneasiness. Note, It is no strange nor new thing for a minister to meet with very unkind returns for great good-will to a people, and diligent and successful services among them. Some among the Corinthians questioned, if they did not disown, his apostolical character. To their cavils he here answers, and in such a manner as to set forth himself as a remarkable example of that self-denial, for the good of others, which he had been recommending in the former chapter. And, 1. He asserts his apostolical mission and character: Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? To be a witness of his resurrection was one great branch of the apostolical charge. "Now,"says Paul, "have not I seen the Lord, though not immediately after his resurrection, yet since his ascent?"See 1Co 4:8. " Am I not free? Have I not the same commission, and charge, and powers, with the other apostles? What respect, or honour, or subsistence, can they challenge, which I am not at liberty to demand as well as they?"It was not because he had no right to live of the gospel that he maintained himself with his own hands, but for other reasons. 2. He offers the success of his ministry among them, and the good he had done to them, as a proof of his apostleship: " Are not you my work in the Lord? Through the blessing of Christ on my labours, have not I raised a church among you? The seal of my apostleship are you in the Lord. Your conversion by my means is a confirmation from God of my mission."Note, The ministers of Christ should not think it strange to be put upon the proof of their ministry by some who have had experimental evidence of the power of it and the presence of God with it. 3. He justly upbraids the Corinthians with their disrespect: " Doubtless, if I am not an apostle to others, I am so to you, 1Co 9:2. I have laboured so long, and with so much success, among you, that you, above all others, should own and honour my character, and not call it in question."Note, It is no new thing for faithful ministers to meet with the worst treatment where they might expect the best. This church at Corinth had as much reason to believe, and as little reason to question, his apostolical mission, as any; they had as much reason, perhaps more than any church, to pay him respect. He had been instrumental in bringing them to the knowledge and faith of Christ; he laboured long among them, nearly two years, and he laboured to good purpose, God having much people among them. See Act 18:10, Act 18:11. It was aggravated ingratitude for this people to call in question his authority.

Matthew Henry: 1Co 9:3-14

Having asserted his apostolical authority, he proceeds to claim the rights belonging to his office, especially that of being maintained by it.

I. These he states, 1Co 9:3-6. " My answer to those that do examine me (that is, enquire into my authority, or the reasons of my conduct, if I am an apostle) is this: Have we not power to eat and drink (1Co 9:4), or a right to maintenance? Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas; and, not only to be maintained ourselves, but have them maintained also?"Though Paul was at that time single, he had a right to take a wife when he pleased, and to lead her about with him, and expect a maintenance for her, as well as himself, from the churches. Perhaps Barnabas had a wife, as the other apostles certainly had, and led them about with them. For that a wife is here to be understood by the sister - woman - adelphēn gunaika , is plain from this, that it would have been utterly unfit for the apostles to have carried about women with them unless they were wives. The word implies that they had power over them, and could require their attendance on them, which none could have over any but wives or servants. Now the apostles, who worked for their bread, do not seem to have been in a capacity to buy or have servants to carry with them. Not to observe that it would have raised suspicion to have carried about even women-servants, and much more other women to whom they were not married, for which the apostles would never give any occasion. The apostle therefore plainly asserts he had a right to marry as well as other apostles, and claim a maintenance for his wife, nay, and his children too, if he had any, from the churches, without labouring with his own hands to procure it. Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to for bear working? 1Co 9:6. In short, the apostle here claims a maintenance from the churches, both for him and his. This was due from them, and what he might claim.

II. He proceeds, by several arguments, to prove his claim. 1. From the common practice and expectations of mankind. Those who addict and give themselves up to any way of business in the world expect to live out of it. Soldiers expect to be paid for their service. Husbandmen and shepherds expect to get a livelihood out of their labours. If they plant vineyards, and dress and cultivate them, it is with expectation of fruit; if they feed a flock, it is with the expectation of being fed and clothed by it! Who goeth a warfare at any time at his own charge? Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not the fruit thereof? Who feedeth a flock, and eateth not the milk thereof? 1Co 9:7-9. Note, It is very natural, and very reasonable, for ministers to expect a livelihood out of their labours. 2. He argues it out of the Jewish law: Say I these things as a man? Or saith not the law the same also? 1Co 9:8. Is this merely a dictate of common reason and according to common usage only? No, it is also consonant to the old law. God had therein ordered that the ox should not be muzzled while he was treading out the corn, nor hindered from eating while he was preparing the corn for man's use, and treading it out of the ear. But this law was not chiefly given out of God's regard to oxen, or concern for them, but to teach mankind that all due encouragement should be given to those who are employed by us, or labouring for our good - that the labourers should taste of the fruit of their labours. Those who plough should plough in hope; and those who thresh in hope should be partakers of their hope, 1Co 9:10. The law saith this about oxen for our sakes. Note, Those that lay themselves out to do our souls good should not have their mouths muzzled, but have food provided for them. 3. He argues from common equity: If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? What they had sown was much better than they expected to reap. They had taught them the way to eternal life, and laboured heartily to put them in possession of it. It was no great matter, surely, while they were giving themselves up to this work, to expect a support of their own temporal life. They had been instruments of conveying to them the greater spiritual blessings; and had they no claim to as great a share in their carnal things as was necessary to subsist them? Note, Those who enjoy spiritual benefits by the ministry of the word should not grudge a maintenance to such as are employed in this work. If they have received a real benefit, one would think they could not grudge them this. What, get so much good by them, and yet grudge to do so little good to them! Is this grateful or equitable? 4. He argues from the maintenance they afforded others: " If others are partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? You allow others this maintenance, and confess their claim just; but who has so just a claim as I from the church of Corinth? Who has given greater evidence of the apostolic mission? Who had laboured so much for your good, or done like service among you?"Note, Ministers should be valued and provided for according to their worth. " Nevertheless, "says the apostle, " we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. We have not insisted on our right, but have rather been in straits to serve the interests of the gospel, and promote the salvation of souls."He renounced his right, rather than by claiming it he would hinder his success. He denied himself, for fear of giving offence; but asserted his right lest his self-denial should prove prejudicial to the ministry. Note, He is likely to plead most effectually for the rights of others who shows a generous disregard to his own. It is plain, in this case, that justice, and not self-love, is the principle by which he is actuated. 5. He argues from the old Jewish establishment: " Do you not know that those who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple, and those who wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? 1Co 9:13. And, if the Jewish priesthood was maintained out of the holy things that were then offered, shall not Christ's ministers have a maintenance out of their ministry? Is there not as much reason that we should be maintained as they?"He asserts it to be the institution of Christ: " Even so hath the Lord ordained that those who preach the gospel should live of the gospel (1Co 9:14), should have a right to a maintenance, though not bound to demand it, and insist upon it."It is the people's duty to maintain their minister, by Christ's appointment, though it be not a duty bound on every minister to call for or accept it. He may waive his right, as Paul did, without being a sinner; but those transgress an appointment of Christ who deny or withhold it. Those who preach the gospel have a right to live by it; and those who attend on their ministry, and yet take no thought about their subsistence, fail very much in their duty to Christ, and respect owing to them.

Matthew Henry: 1Co 9:15-18

Here he tells them that he had, notwithstanding, waived his privilege, and lays down his reason for doing it.

I. He tells them that he had neglected to claim his right in times past: I have used none of these things, 1Co 9:15. He neither ate nor drank himself at their cost, nor led about a wife to be maintained by them, nor forbore working to maintain himself. From others he received a maintenance, but not from them, for some special reasons. Nor did he write this to make his claim now. Though he here asserts his right, yet he does not claim his due; but denies himself for their sakes, and the gospel.

II. We have the reason assigned of his exercising this self-denial. He would not have his glorying made void: It were better for his to die than that any man should make his glorying void, 1Co 9:15. This glorying did imply nothing in it of boasting, or self-conceit, or catching at applause, but a high degree of satisfaction and comfort. It was a singular pleasure to him to preach the gospel without making it burdensome; and he was resolved that among them he would not lose this satisfaction. His advantages for promoting the gospel were his glory, and he valued them above his rights, or his very life: Better were it for him to die than to have his glorying made void, than to have it justly said that he preferred his wages to his work. No, he was ready to deny himself for the sake of the gospel. Note, It is the glory of a minister to prefer the success of his ministry to his interest, and deny himself, that he may serve Christ, and save souls. Not that in so doing he does more than he ought; he is still acting within the bounds of the law of charity. But he acts upon truly noble principles, he brings much honour to God in so doing; and those that honour him he will honour. It is what God will approve and commend, what a man may value himself for and take comfort in, though he cannot make a merit of it before God.

III. He shows that this self-denial was more honourable in itself, and yielded him much more content and comfort, than his preaching did: " Though I preach the gospel, I have nothing whereof to glory; for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel, 1Co 9:16. It is my charge, my business; it is the work for which I am constituted an apostle, 1Co 1:17. This is a duty expressly bound upon me. It is not in any degree a matter of liberty. Necessity is upon me. I am false and unfaithful to my trust, I break a plain and express command, and woe be to me, if I do not preach the gospel. "Those who are set apart to the office of the ministry have it in charge to preach the gospel. Woe be to them if they do not. From this none is excepted. But it is not given in charge to all, nor any preacher of the gospel, to do his work gratis, to preach and have no maintenance out of it. It is not said, "Woe be to him if he do not preach the gospel, and yet maintain himself."In this point he is more at liberty. It may be his duty to preach at some seasons, and under some circumstances, without receiving a maintenance for it; but he has, in the general, a right to it, and may expect it from those among whom he labours. When he renounces this right for the sake of the gospel and the souls of men, though he does not supererogate, yet he denies himself, waives his privilege and right; he does more than his charge and office in general, and at all times, obliges him to. Woe be to him if he do not preach the gospel; but it may sometimes be his duty to insist on his maintenance for so doing, and whenever he forbears to claim it he parts with his right, though a man may sometimes be bound to do so by the general duties of love to God and charity to men. Note, It is a high attainment in religion to renounce our own rights for the good of others; this will entitle to a peculiar reward from God. For,

IV. The apostle here informs us that doing our duty with a willing mind will meet with a gracious recompence from God: If I do this thing, that is, either preach the gospel or take no maintenance, willingly, I have a reward. Indeed, it is willing service only that is capable of reward from God. It is not the bare doing of any duty, but the doing of it heartily (that is, willingly and cheerfully) that God has promised to reward. Leave the heart out of our duties, and God abhors them: they are but the carcasses, without the life and spirit, of religion. Those must preach willingly who would be accepted of God in this duty. They must make their business a pleasure, and not esteem it a drudgery. And those who, out of regard to the honour of God or good of souls, give up their claim to a maintenance, should do this duty willingly, if they would be accepted in it or rewarded for it. But whether the duty of the office be done willingly or with reluctance, whether the heart be in it or averse from it, all in office have a trust and charge from God, for which they must be accountable. Ministers have a dispensation of the gospel, or stewardship - oikonomia (Luk 16:2), committed to them. Note, Christ's willing servants shall not fail of a recompence, and that proportioned to their fidelity, zeal, and diligence; and his slothful and unwilling servants shall all be called to an account. Taking his name, and professing to do his business, will make men accountable at his bar. And how sad an account have slothful servants to give!

V. The apostle sums up the argument, by laying before them the encouraging hope he had of a large recompence for his remarkable self-denial: What is my reward then? 1Co 9:18. What is it I expect a recompence from God for? That when I preach the gospel I may make it without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel. Or, "not so to claim my rights as to make them destroy the great intentions and ends of my office, but renounce them for the sake of these."It is an abuse of power to employ it against the very ends for which it is given. And the apostle would never use his power, or privilege of being maintained by his ministry, so as to frustrate the ends of it, but would willingly and cheerfully deny himself for the honour of Christ and the interest of souls. That ministers who follows his example may have cheerful expectations of a full recompence.

Barclay: 1Co 9:1-14

At first sight this chapter seems quite disconnected from what goes before but in fact it is not. The whole point lies in this--the Corinthians who considered themselves mature Christians have been claiming that they are in such a privileged position that they are free to eat meat offered to idols if they like. Their Christian freedom gives them--as they think--a special position in which they could do things which might not be permissible to lesser men. Paul's way of answering that argument is to set forth the many privileges which he himself had a perfect right to claim, but which he did not claim in case they should turn out to be stumbling-blocks to others and hindrances to the effectiveness of the gospel.

First, he claims to be an apostle, which immediately set him in a very special position. He uses two arguments to prove the reality of his apostleship.

(i) He has seen the Lord. Over and over again the Book of Acts makes it clear that the supreme test of an apostle is that he is a witness of the Resurrection. (Act 1:22; Act 2:32; Act 3:15; Act 4:33). This is of intense importance. Faith, in the New Testament, is very seldom acquiescence in a creed; it is almost always trust in a person. Paul does not say, "I know what I have believed." He says, "I know whom I have believed." (2Ti 1:12). When Jesus called his disciples, he did not say to them, "I have a philosophy which I would like you to examine," or, "I have an ethical system which I would like you to consider," or, "I offer you a statement of belief which I would like you to discuss." He said, "Follow me." All Christianity begins with this personal relationship with Jesus Christ. To be a Christian is to know him personally. As Carlyle once said when a minister was being chosen, "What this Church needs is someone who knows Christ other than at second-hand."

(ii) Paul's second claim is that his ministry has been effective. The Corinthians themselves are the proof of that. He calls them his seal. In ancient days the seal was extremely important. When a cargo of grain or dates or the like was being sent off, the last thing done was that the containers were sealed with a seal to show that the consignment was genuinely what it claimed to be. When a will was made it was sealed with seven seals; and it was not legally valid unless it was produced with the seven seals intact. The seal was the guarantee of genuineness. The very fact of the Corinthian Church was the guarantee of Paul's apostleship. The final proof that a man himself knows Christ is that he can bring others to him. It is said that once a young soldier, lying in pain in a hospital, said to Florence Nightingale as she bent over to tend him, "You are Christ to me." The reality of a man's Christianity is best proved by the fact that he helps others to be Christian.

The privilege that Paul might have claimed was support from the Church. Not only could he have claimed such support for himself but also for a wife. In fact the other apostles did receive such support. The Greeks despised manual labour; no free Greek would willingly work with his hands. Aristotle declared that all men were divided into two classes--the cultured and the hewers of wood and drawers of water who existed solely to perform the menial tasks for the others, and whom it was not only mistaken but actually wrong to seek to raise and educate. The enemies of Socrates and Plato had in fact taunted them because they took no money for teaching, and had hinted that they did so because their teaching was worth nothing. It is true that every Jewish Rabbi was supposed to teach for nothing and to have a trade whereby he earned his daily bread; but these same Rabbis took very good care to inculcate the teaching that there was no more meritorious deed than to support a Rabbi. If a man wished a comfortable place in heaven he could not better assure himself of it than by supplying all a Rabbi's needs. On every ground Paul could have claimed the privilege of being supported by the Church.

He uses ordinary human analogies. No soldier has to provide his own rations. Why should the soldier of Christ have to do so? The man who plants a vineyard shares in the fruits. Why should the man who plants churches not do so? The shepherd of the flock gets his food from the flock. Why should not the Christian pastor do likewise? Even scripture says that the ox who works the threshing machine is not to be muzzled but is to be allowed to eat of the grain (Deu 25:4). As any Rabbi would, Paul allegorizes that instruction and makes it apply to the Christian teacher.

The priest who serves in the Temple receives his share of the offerings. In Greek sacrifice the priest, as we have seen, received the ribs, the ham and the left side of the face. But it is worth while looking at the perquisites of the priests in the Temple at Jerusalem.

There were five main offerings. (i) The Burnt-offering. This alone was burnt entire except the stomach, the entrails and the sinew of the thigh (compare Gen 32:32). But even in this the priests received the hides, and did a flourishing trade with them. (ii) The Sin-offering. In this case only the fat was burned on the altar and the priests received all the flesh. (iii) The Trespass-offering. Again the fat alone was burned and the priests received all the flesh. (iv) The Meat-offering. This consisted of flour and wine and oil. Only a token part was offered on the altar; by far the greater part was the perquisite of the priests. (v) The Peace-offering. The fat and the entrails were burned on the altar; the priest received the breast and the right shoulder; and the rest was given back to the worshipper.

The priests enjoyed still further perquisites. (i) They received the first-fruits of the seven kinds--wheat, barley, the vine, the fig-tree, the pomegranate, the olive and honey. (ii) The Terumah (08641). This was the offering of the choicest fruits of every growing thing. The priests had the right to an average of one fiftieth of any crop. (iii) The Tithe. A tithe had to be given of "everything which may be used as food and is cultivated and grows out of the earth." This tithe belonged to the Levites; but the priests received a tithe of the tithe that the Levites received. (iv) The Challah (02471). This was the offering of kneaded dough. If dough was made with wheat, barley, spelt, oats or rye, a private individual had to give to the priests one twenty-fourth part, a public baker one forty-eighth part.

All this is at the back of Paul's refusal to accept even the basic supplies of life from the Church. He refused for two reasons: (i) The priests were a byword. While the ordinary Jewish family ate meat at the most once a week the priests suffered from an occupational disease consequent on eating too much meat. Their privileges, the luxury of their lives, their rapacity were notorious; Paul knew all about this. He knew how they used religion as a means to grow fat; and he was determined that he would go to the other extreme and take nothing. (ii) The second reason was his sheer independence. It may well be that he carried it too far, because it seems that he hurt the Corinthians by refusing all aid. But Paul was one of those independent souls who would starve rather than be beholden to anyone.

In the last analysis one thing dominated his conduct. He would do nothing that would bring discredit on the gospel or hinder it. Men judge a message by the life and character of the man who brings it; and Paul was determined that his hands would be clean. He would allow nothing in his life to contradict the message of his lips. Someone once said to a preacher, "I cannot hear what you say for listening to what you are." No one could ever say that to Paul.

Barclay: 1Co 9:15-23

In this passage there is a kind of outline of Paul's whole conception of his ministry.

(i) He regarded it as a privilege. The one thing he will not do is take money for working for Christ. When a certain famous American professor retired from his chair he made a speech in which he thanked his university for paying him a salary all these years for doing work which he would gladly have paid to do. This does not mean that a man must always work for nothing; there are certain obligations that he must fulfil which he cannot fulfil for nothing; but it does mean that he should never work primarily for money. He should regard his work not as a career of accumulation but as an opportunity of service. He must regard himself as a man whose primary duty is not to help himself but whose privilege is to serve others for God's sake.

(ii) He regarded it as a duty. Paul's point of view was that if he had chosen to be a preacher of the gospel he might quite legitimately have demanded payment for his work; but he had not chosen the work; it had chosen him; he could no more stop doing it than he could stop breathing; and there could, therefore, be no question of payment.

Ramon Lull, the great Spanish saint and mystic, tells us how he became a missionary of Christ. He had been living a careless and pleasure-loving life. Then one day, when he was alone, Christ came carrying his Cross and saying to him, "Carry this for me." But he refused. Again, when he was in the silence of a great cathedral, Christ came and asked him to carry his Cross; and again he refused. In a lonely moment Christ came a third time, and this time, said Ramon Lull, "He took his Cross and with a look he left it lying in my hands. What could I do but take it up and carry it on?" Paul would have said, "What can I do but tell men the good news of Christ?"

(iii) In spite of the fact that he would take no payment, Paul knew that he received daily a great reward. He had the satisfaction of bringing the gospel freely to all men who would receive it. It is a ways true that the real reward of any task is not its money payment but the satisfaction of a job well done. That is why the biggest thing in life is not to choose the job with the biggest pay but the one in which we will find the greatest satisfaction.

Albert Schweitzer describes the kind of moment which brought him the greatest happiness. Someone suffering intensely is brought into his hospital. He soothes the man by telling him that he will put him to sleep and will operate on him and all will be well. After the operation he sits beside the patient waiting for him to regain consciousness. Slowly he opens his eyes and then whispers in sheer wonderment, "I have no more pain." That was it. There was no material reward there, but a satisfaction as deep as the depths of the heart itself.

To have mended one shattered life, to have restored one wanderer to the right way, to have healed one broken heart, to have brought one soul to Christ is not a thing whose reward can be measured in financial terms, but its joy is beyond all measurement.

(iv) Finally, Paul speaks about the method of his ministry, which was to become all things to all men. This is not a case of being hypocritically one thing to one man and another to another. It Is a matter in the modern phrase, of being able to get alongside anyone. The man who can never see anything but his own point of view and who never makes any attempt to understand the mind and heart of others, will never make a pastor or an evangelist or even a friend.

Boswell somewhere speaks of "the art of accommodating oneself to others." That was an art which Dr. Johnson possessed in a supreme degree, for, not only was he a great talker, but he was also a great listener with a supreme ability to get alongside any man. A friend said of him that he had the art of "leading people to talk on their favourite subjects, and on what they knew best." Once a country clergyman complained to Mrs. Thrale's mother of the dullness of his people. "They talk of runts" (young cows), he said bitterly. "Sir," said the old lady, "Mr. Johnson would have learned to talk of runts." To the countryman he would have become a countryman. Robert Lynd points out how Johnson would discuss the digestive apparatus of a dog with a country parson; how he talked dancing with. a dancing master; how he talked on farm management, thatching, the process of malting, the manufacture of gunpowder, the art of tanning. He talks of Johnson's "readiness to throw himself into the interests of other people. He was a man who would have enjoyed discussing the manufacture of spectacles with a spectacle-maker, law with a lawyer, pigs with a pig-breeder, diseases with a doctor, or ships with a ship-builder. He knew that in conversation it is only more blessed to give than to receive."

We can never attain to any kind of evangelism or friendship without speaking the same language and thinking the same thoughts as the other man. Someone once described teaching, medicine and the ministry as "the three patronizing professions." So long as we patronize people and make no effort to understand them, we can never get anywhere with them. Paul, the master missionary, who won more men for Christ than any other man, saw how essential it was to become all things to all men. One of our greatest necessities is to learn the art of getting alongside people; and the trouble so often is that we do not even try.

Constable: 1Co 7:1--16:13

III. Questions asked of Paul 7:1--16:12

The remainder of the body of this epistle deals with questions the Corinthians had put to Paul in a letter. Paul introduced each of these with the phrase peri de ("now concerning," 7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12).

"Rather than a friendly exchange, in which the new believers in Corinth are asking spiritual advice of their mentor in the Lord, their letter was probably a response to Paul's Previous Letter mentioned in 5:9, in which they were taking exception to his position on point after point. In light of their own theology of spirit, with heavy emphasis on wisdom' and knowledge,' they have answered Paul with a kind of Why can't we?' attitude, in which they are looking for his response."¹⁶⁰

Constable: 1Co 8:1--11:2

B. Food offered to idols 8:1-11:1

The Corinthians had asked Paul another question, evidently in a combative spirit judging by the apostle's response. It involved a practice common in their culture.

The commentators understand the situation that Paul addressed in two different ways. Some of them believe that the eating of marketplace food that pagans had previously offered to idols was amoral in itself, but it was controversial enough to cause division among the church members. If this was indeed the issue that Paul addressed, it is only one of many similar "doubtful things." Advocates of this view believe that the apostle's directions to his readers here give us guidance in dealing with contemporary doubtful (amoral) matters.

Other interpreters believe that eating food sacrificed to idols involved a specific form of idolatry and was, therefore, not amoral but sinful (cf. 5:10-11). They assume that Paul was responding to the Corinthians' objection to his prohibition of this practice that he had written in his former letter to them. This view sees 8:10 and 10:1-22 as expressing the basic problem to which Paul was responding. I believe the text supports this interpretation of the facts better than the former one.

"That going to the temples is the real issue is supported by the fact that the eating of cultic meals was a regular part of worship in antiquity. This is true not only of the nations that surrounded Israel, but of Israel itself. In the Corinth of Paul's time, such meals were still the regular practice both at state festivals and private celebrations of various kinds. There were three parts to these meals: the preparation, the sacrifice proper, and the feast. The meat of the sacrifices apparently was divided into three portions: that burned before the god, that apportioned to the worshipers, and that placed on the table of the god,' which was tended by cultic ministrants but also eaten by the worshipers. The significance of these meals has been much debated, but most likely they involved a combination of religious and social factors. The gods were thought to be present since the meals were held in their honor and sacrifices were made; nonetheless, they were also intensely social occasions for the participants. For the most part the Gentiles who had become believers in Corinth had probably attended such meals all their lives; this was the basic restaurant' in antiquity, and every kind of occasion was celebrated in this fashion.

"The problem, then, is best reconstructed along the following lines. After their conversion--and most likely after the departure of Paul--some of them returned to the practice of attending the cultic meals. In his earlier letter Paul forbade such idolatry'; but they have taken exception to that prohibition and in their letter have made four points:

"(1) They argue that all have knowledge' about idols [i.e., that there are no such things, so participation in these meals is not an issue, cf. vv. 1, 4]. . . .

"(2) They also have knowledge about food, that it is a matter of indifference to God (8:8) . . .

"(3) They seem to have a somewhat magical' view of the sacraments; those who have had Christian baptism and who partake of the Lord's Table are not in any danger of falling (10:1-4).

"(4) Besides, there is considerable question in the minds of many whether Paul has the proper apostolic authority to forbid them on this matter. In their minds this has been substantiated by two factors: first, his failure to accept support while with them; and second, his own apparently compromising stance on idol food sold in the marketplace (he abstained when eating with Jews, but ate when eating with Gentiles; cf. 9:19-23)."¹⁹⁷

Constable: 1Co 9:1-27

2. Paul's apostolic defense ch. 9

The absence of the key phrase "now concerning" is the clue that this chapter does not deal with a new subject. It is a continuation of the discussion of eating in idol temples that Paul began in 8:1. Subjecting our freedom for the welfare of other people is not something any of us does naturally. Paul knew his readers would profit from more instruction on this subject.

Evidently the Corinthian Christians had misunderstood Paul's policy of limiting the exercise of his activities to help others (8:13). Some in the church had apparently concluded that because he did not exercise his rights he did not have them, for example his right to material support (cf. 2 Cor. 12:13). His apparently vascillating conduct also raised questions in their minds about his full apostolic authority. For example, he ate marketplace food with Gentiles but not with Jews. Paul responded to this viewpoint in this chapter. There have been evidences of the Corinthians' unwillingness to yield to Paul's authority throughout this letter (4:1-5; 5-6; cf. 14:36-37). This was an appropriate place for him to confront the issue.

Constable: 1Co 9:1-2

Apostolic identity 9:1-2

9:1 The apostle's four rhetorical questions all expect a positive answer, and they become increasingly specific. Certainly he enjoyed the liberty that every other believer had. Furthermore he possessed the rights and privileges of an apostle. The proof of his apostleship was twofold. He had seen the risen Christ (Acts 1:21-22) on the Damascus road (Acts 22:14-15; 26:15-18), and he had founded the church in Corinth, which was apostolic work (cf. Rom. 15:15-21). Clearly Paul's apostleship was at stake in Corinth (cf. 1:1, 12; 4:1-5, 8-13, 14-21; 5:1-2).

9:2 Others might have doubts about Paul's apostleship, but the Corinthians certainly should not in view of his ministry among them. They themselves were the proof that he was an apostle.

Constable: 1Co 9:3-14

Apostolic rights 9:3-14

The issue of Paul's right to their material support underlies this whole pericope.

"Philosophers and wandering missionaries in the Greco-Roman world were supported' by four means: fees, patronage, begging, and working. Each of these had both proponents and detractors, who viewed rival forms as not worthy of philosophy."²⁰⁷

Paul did not begin by justifying his renunciation of his apostolic rights but by establishing that he had these rights. He evidently had to begin there because the Corinthians were challenging these rights. They were assuming that Paul had worked with his hands because he lacked apostolic rights, not because he had chosen to forgo them.

9:3 If anyone challenged his practice of forgoing his rights as an apostle, his response follows.

9:4 Paul used the series of rhetorical questions that begins here to force the Corinthians to recognize--they should already have known--that he possessed full apostolic rights. In view of the other rights that follow, Paul's reference to eating and drinking here probably means to eat and drink at the expense of others. It means to accept financial support in his ministry.

9:5 Evidently it was customary for the other apostles and the Lord's physical brothers to take their wives with them when they travelled to minister. The churches they served covered the expenses of these women as well as those of their husbands. Paul may have mentioned Peter in particular because he had a strong following in Corinth (1:12). His references to the Lord's brothers in this verse and to Barnabas in the next do not necessarily mean that these men had visited Corinth. Probably the Corinthians knew about their habits of ministering second-hand.

9:6 The Corinthians had acknowledged the right of the other apostles to refrain from secular employment. Paul and Barnabas chose to work with their hands at times so their financial support would not burden their converts (4:12; 1 Thess. 2:9; 2 Thess. 3:7-9; Acts 20:34). Evidently the practice of Barnabas was well known. Paul had stooped to the demeaning work of making tents while he ministered in Corinth (Acts 18:3). Apparently some of the Corinthian Christians took Paul's action as an indication that he did not think of himself as worthy of support because he was not equal with the other apostles.

9:7 These three illustrations support the fact that Paul as a servant of the Lord had a right to accept support from those to whom he ministered. The Lord's servants are certainly not inferior to field hands, farmers, and animals.

9:8-9 God made special provision in the Mosaic Law for the oxen that served people by threshing their grain (Deut. 25:4). In so doing, Paul said, God was teaching His concern for the maintenance of all who serve others, not just oxen.

9:10 God meant to encourage human laborers with His provision for animals that labored. He wanted human laborers to work with the hope of pay. The people who profited from those services should consider those who served them worthy of support.

9:11 Spiritual things are intrinsically more important than physical things. The former will last forever whereas the latter are only temporary. How much more then should those who benefit from spiritual ministry support physically those who minister to them. "Is it too much" reveals that Paul was contending with the Corinthians, not just exhorting them.

9:12 As the planter of the Corinthian church Paul had a right to the support of the Corinthians more than any of their other ministers did. Yet he did not insist on his right. He chose rather to support himself so his work of establishing the church might not suffer from criticism that he was serving for the material benefits he derived from his converts.

9:13 Paul appealed to the common Jewish practice, that was also prevalent in pagan religions, of allowing those who minister in spiritual matters to gain physical support from those they serve.

9:14 The Lord Jesus taught the same right (Luke 10:7).

"All too often, one fears, the objective of this text is lost in concerns over rights' that reflect bald professionalism rather than a concern for the gospel itself."²⁰⁸

Constable: 1Co 9:15-18

Apostolic restraint 9:15-18

Having argued vigorously for his right to the Corinthians' support, Paul now proceeded to argue just as strongly for his right to give up this right, his point from the beginning. He explained why he had deliberately not accepted their patronage. This pericope gives the reader a window into the apostle's soul. We see here what made him tick.

9:15 Paul had this right, but he chose not to use it. He did not want his readers to interpret what he had said on this subject as a veiled request for support. He had made his decision to support himself while he preached freely; the Lord did not require this of him. Consequently he could take justifiable pride in it, as anyone who makes a sacrifice for the welfare of others can.

9:16 He could not take justifiable pride in the fact that he preached the gospel, however. Even though it involved sacrificing for the benefit of others, he had made those sacrifices in obedience to the Lord (Acts 26:16-18; cf. Matt. 28:19-20). He had no choice about preaching the gospel as he did about how he would live while he did so. Preaching was his divine destiny. Indeed he would be in serious trouble with his Lord if he did not preach the gospel. (And so will we.)

9:17 If he preached the gospel willingly, he would receive a reward (pay) from the Lord. If he did so unwillingly, he would not receive a reward but would be simply doing his duty as a steward (manager of a household; cf. 4:1-2).

9:18 Paul's reward for preaching the gospel willingly was the privilege of preaching it without cost to his hearers. His highest pay was the privilege of preaching without pay.²⁰⁹ This choice may seem as though it was Paul's decision rather than a reward from the Lord, but he viewed it as a privilege that came to him from the Lord (cf. 2 Cor. 11:7-12).

Paul had all the rights of an apostle and was free to insist on them if he chose to do so. He also had the freedom not to insist on them. His relinquishing his right to support corresponds to his giving up his right to eat in a pagan temple (8:13). In both cases it was the welfare of others that led him to forgo a legitimate right.

College: 1Co 9:1-27

1 CORINTHIANS 9

B. THE RIGHTS OF AN APOSTLE (9:1-27)

1. Paul's Rights as Apostle (9:1-6)

¹ Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord? ² Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.

³ This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me. ⁴ Don't we have the right to food and drink? ⁵ Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas ^a ? ⁶ Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?

^a 5 That is, Peter

9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord?

Even though the issue of eating food that had been offered to idols is not explicitly mentioned in chapter 9, this chapter nevertheless follows quite logically upon these very issues mentioned in the preceding chapter. After having instructed those knowledge-abusers among the Corinthian believers to defer to their weaker brothers, Paul realizes it will be necessary for him to demonstrate this principle of deference to others in his own life. Calvin makes a similar observation in commenting on the opening words of 9:1. Calvin writes,

he [Paul] confirms from actual fact what he had just been saying, that he would never taste meat all his life, rather than cause a brother to stumble. At the same time he makes it plain that he cannot demand anything from them which he himself had not put into practice. There is no doubt that natural justice requires that anybody who imposes some obligation on others should observe it himself. But a Christian teacher, above all, should discipline himself in this way, so that men may always see teaching backed up by the example of his life.

The issue of freedom (ejleuvqero", eleutheros ) that Paul brings up in 9:1 is conceptually related to the issue of rights which is addressed throughout this chapter. In order to highlight the magnitude of the freedom which Paul is willing to forsake in his life, he introduces the fact that he is an apostle. Having mentioned his apostolic calling (see notes on 1:1), Paul then mentions two of the criteria that establish his credentials as an apostle. The first is his experience of the risen Lord. Even though Paul could never have been qualified to be in the inner circle of the Twelve, he was, based upon his experience of the risen Lord, an apostle in the service of God. (On the relationship between apostolic calling and experience of the risen Lord, see notes on 15:7-8.) Since the concept of apostolic calling related directly to the issue of establishing and nurturing churches, it was quite natural for Paul to mention his work among the Corinthians themselves as a second proof of his apostolic calling. This is specifically what Paul has in mind by the question, "are you not the result of my work in the Lord?" As C.K. Barrett noted in this regard, "the existence of the church authenticates, as nothing else could do, the apostolic ministry of its founder."

9:2 Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.

The content of this verse leads the interpreter into a second issue which Paul wants to address in this chapter. The second issue that is woven throughout this chapter is that of Paul's need to make a defense of his apostolic ministry and practice. The defensive nature of Paul in this section is evident in the fact that he acknowledges that not everybody regards him as an apostle. When Paul writes that he may not be an apostle to others, this is not just a historical observation that he did not found all the Christian congregations in the first century. Rather, he is calling upon the loyalty of the Corinthians so that they will stand behind his apostolic authority against detractors. Because of the tight connection between these two issues which Paul addresses in chapter 9, many scholars rightly believe that the saints whom Paul is criticizing are in fact some of the very ones more prone to challenge his apostolic authority. It is probably correct then to see these two issues going together hand in hand not only in the rhetoric of this chapter but also in the historical realities of the church at Corinth at this time.

Not all scholars, however, would agree with this reconstruction. Witherington states, for example, that, "there is no hint here that Paul thinks that his apostolic office is seriously doubted by any significant number of people." Granted, we cannot know whether the detractors consisted of "any significant number of people." It is clear, however, from other places in 1 Corinthians that Paul was aware of saints in Corinth who did not express a loyalty to him. (1:10ff and ch. 4). By his use of the metaphor "seal" (sfragiv", sphragis ) in 9:2, Paul points toward the idea that the Corinthians themselves are the attestation of his apostleship in the Lord. This argument reminds the Corinthians that if he were not an apostle, then they would not be believers, and since they are, then he is.

9:3 This is my defense to those who sit in judgment on me.

Notwithstanding the fact that some interpreters do not believe that Paul is involved in an apology for his apostleship in this chapter, the occurrence of the phrase "my defense" (ejmhÉ ajpologiva, emç apologia) here militates against this understanding. Certainly the entire chapter is not a defense of his apostolic calling. Fee points in the right direction about the nature of the issue that Paul is dealing with in chapter 9 when he writes, "since a crisis of authority lies behind much of this letter (cf. 4:1-5; 5-6; 14:36-37), Paul takes this occasion, which arose directly from their letter, to hit it head on." Since Paul acknowledges in 9:3 that some believers were sitting in judgment of him, the question arises for the interpreter about what points they were judging him on.

9:4 Don't we have the right to food and drink?

The reference to "the right" (ejxousiva, exousia ) to food and drink in this verse has engendered two major interpretive traditions. One school of thought relates the food and drink back to the preceding chapter. This would indicate that Paul is affirming that he has the right to participate at banquets in temple dining halls. C.K. Barrett, for example, is sympathetic with this view when he writes "it appears that there is also much weight in the view that Paul is claiming here the right to eat and drink without regard to the idolatrous or other origin of his food."

A second line of interpretation sees the reference to food and drink in the context of the other issue mentioned in verses 4-6. In particular, according to this second perspective, Paul would be referring to food and drink as one of the normal components of life, much like having a wife (9:5) and working for a living (9:6). This second school of interpretation seems to be the one that has more evidence in its favor.

This means then that some of Paul's detractors who sit in judgment of him are complaining about issues related to his method of support and his apostolic lifestyle. At this juncture it is important to give an overview of the cultural values and assumptions some of Paul's detractors may have participated in which would have led them to be critical of Paul in these matters. It is important for the modern interpreter of Paul to understand that there was a significant debate in the ancient world regarding the methods and ways in which men like Paul received remuneration for their efforts. Cities of the ancient world were filled with both stationary and itinerant moral philosophers as well as religious preachers. Long before the advent of the gospel and long before the widespread presence of Jews in Greek and Roman cities, wandering pagan philosophers would travel from town to town, collect disciples, and propagate their individual messages. But how were these activities financed?

There were apparently four major ways that these ancient moral philosophers and religious teachers found support for their individual services. The first way of support was by charging fees for their teaching. The second was by entering the household of a wealthy and influential individual, thereby gaining a patron. The third was through begging, and the fourth was by working. Each of these four methods of acquiring support had its advocates and critics in the ancient world. While we cannot know with certainty, it was probably the case in Corinth that some of those believers whose practices Paul challenged in chapter 8 were the very ones who were critical of Paul in the matter of his financial base and support.

This reconstruction is very plausible in light of prior evidence that is seen in chapter 4. In 4:10-12 Paul contrasts his own socioeconomic and cultural status with those of some of his detractors at Corinth who are much higher in their social standing than he is. It is important to notice that these contrasts are not solely doctrinal but socioeconomic differences. Thus, in 4:11 he points out that he goes hungry and thirsty, is dressed in rags, and is homeless. In addition he points out in 4:12 that he, unlike his detractors, works hard with his own hands. It is highly probable then that Paul is having to defend his means of income in 9:4 because of the attacks against him and the disdain that some of the Corinthian converts feel toward him because of the menial nature of his profession. As Hock noted, "in the social world of a city like Corinth, Paul would have been a weak figure, without power, prestige, and privilege. . . . to those of wealth and power, the appearance of the artisan was that befitting a slave."

9:5 Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?

Paul now raises the issue of his right to be married. The phrase that the NIV translates as "believing wife" is based upon Greek words which mean a sister as a wife (ajdelfhÉn gunai'ka, adelphçn gynaika). Most commentators rightly take the word sister there in its metaphorical sense, whereby Paul is pointing to a woman fellow believer. It is hard to picture the apostle Paul allowing a believer to take an unbeliever as a spouse (cf. 1 Cor 7:39).

In this verse he also acknowledges that other apostles have wives. We cannot be certain which group the apostle Paul is referring to by his use of the term the other apostles. (See notes on the word "apostle" at 15:7). The expression the "brothers of the Lord" would most naturally refer to Jesus' biological siblings who are mentioned in the gospels as well as the book of Acts, and perhaps in the reference to James in 1 Cor 15:7. The word Cephas in 9:5 refers to the apostle Peter, whose name played an important role in the issue of division and strife in 1 Cor 1-4. The fact that Cephas was married is attested also by Mark 1:30, where the evangelist refers to the illness of Peter's mother-in-law.

The historic Roman Catholic position that the apostle Peter and his later successors as popes were not married had great difficulty with the content of this verse. Calvin's commentary testifies to the intensity of this debate during the period of the early Protestant reformation. Calvin notes,

but here the papists evade the issue by a fine piece of cunning reason, of their own devising. For they say that the apostles refrained from intercourse, but took their wives about with them, so that they might get the fruits of the gospel, in other words their maintenance at other people's expense. As if, indeed, they could not be supported by the churches unless they wandered from place to place! And, also as if one could believe that those wives ran all over the place of their own free will, and when there was no need to do so, simply to live in idleness at public expense! Ambrose's explanation that the reference is to other men's wives, who were eagerly following the apostles to hear what they had to teach, is far-fetched indeed.

9:6 Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?

In harmony with the intent of questions in the preceding verses, Paul here wants to demonstrate that he and Barnabas have given up rights that they have. It is regrettable that the NIV's translation has obscured the punch line in Paul's question in this verse. In the Greek text of verses 4, 5, and 6 Paul repeats the same phrase, "do we not have the right" (oujk e[comen ejxousivan, ouk echomen exousian ). It is unfortunate that the NIV translated this phrase consistently in verse 4 and 5 but failed to render it consistently in verse 6. The interpreter, however, needs to be aware of the fact that Paul is raising the same fundamental issue in verse 6 that he has raised in 9:4-5.

Paul's point in 9:6 is to ask the Corinthians whether or not he and Barnabas in fact have the right not to work for a living in their Christian service. Paul's point is that he in fact does have the right to receive remuneration from the Corinthians, thereby excluding the need for himself and Barnabas to have to work (ejrgavzesqai, ergazesthai ) with their own hands. Having established the fact that he has a right not to work, he will then proceed to demonstrate that he has surrendered this right to receive support from the Corinthians.

At one level Paul's strategy in 9:6 is to exploit the cultural prejudices of his detractors to justify his decision to neither do manual labor or to be "patronized" by them. By his phrase "work for a living" Paul is referring to manual labor. As Robertson and Plummer noted in this regard, "here again Greek sentiment would be against the apostle's practice. That a teacher who claimed to lead and to rule could work with his hands for a living would be thought most unbecoming: nothing but the direst necessity excused labor in a free citizen (Aristotle Politics 3.5)."

2. General Principle Stated (9:7-14)

⁷ Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk? ⁸ Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn't the Law say the same thing? ⁹ For it is written in the Law of Moses: "Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain." ^a Is it about oxen that God is concerned? ¹⁰ Surely he says this for us, doesn't he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest. ¹¹ If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you? ¹² If others have this right of support from you, shouldn't we have it all the more?

But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ. ¹³ Don't you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar? ¹⁴ In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.

^a 9 Deut. 25:4

9:7 Who serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its grapes? Who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk?

As Kistemaker has observed, 9:3-6 lists three rhetorical questions that anticipate an affirmative answer while 9:7 gives three questions which call for a negative response. Each of these three questions is designed to show the right that an individual has for some form of remuneration based upon labor. These are designed by Paul to undergird again the strength of his position which asserts his rights but shows his willingness to surrender his rights and freedoms. The point of the illustration here is not to indicate that a Christian is a soldier in God's army but to make an appeal to a well-known economic reality. All of Paul's readers understood that soldiers were paid by others. Paul's second illustration, this one from agriculture, points to the fact that one who labors in the vineyard receives a form of compensation, namely the right to eat of its grapes. The third illustration is that of a shepherd who tends a flock. The apostle's point is that this individual has the right to drink of the milk.

9:8 Do I say this merely from a human point of view? Doesn't the Law say the same thing?

Paul now moves to undergird his point in these three illustrations with a Scripture quotation. When Paul uses the phrase "human point of view" (kataÉ a[nqrwpon, kata anthrôpon) he is referring to mere human wisdom and observation of life. The apostle realizes his need to anchor his point within the teaching of Scripture. Accordingly, he will cite Old Testament materials which concur with the point of the three illustrations found in 9:7. (For Paul's other uses of the Old Testament citations, see notes at 10:11; 14:21, 34).

9:9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: "Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain." Is it about oxen that God is concerned?

Paul's citation here of the law of Moses comes from Deut 25:4, which is obviously written in an agricultural context. In the quoted verse Moses is saying that an ox that is being used in the harvesting of a crop must be allowed to enjoy the benefits of that harvest. Since the ox is not muzzled, it is able to enjoy the grain. Just as the ox is entitled by God to enjoy the material benefits which come from its labor intensive activity, so the Christian worker is entitled by God to enjoy material benefits from his work in God's service (in God's field, cf. imagery in 1 Cor 3:9). In order to validate the process of taking an illustration from Deut 25 and applying it to the context of a church in a Roman colony, Paul ends verse 9 with a question. The point of the question is to affirm the fact that there are principles involved in this legislation about the ox which go beyond God's concern only for oxen.

9:10 Surely he says this for us, doesn't he? Yes, this was written for us, because when the plowman plows and the thresher threshes, they ought to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest.

By his twofold use of the phrase "for us" (di= hJma'", di' hçmas) in this verse, Paul reveals his deep belief that all Scripture is designed by God for use in instructing the people of God (2 Tim 3:16-17). The apostle Paul obviously would not deny that Deut 25:4 was also concerned about the practice of how the Israelites treated their oxen in the Old Testament, but it is very clear that Paul wants to affirm that it does have abiding significance for members of the church of God in the Roman colony of Corinth. (On this use of the Old Testament by Paul, see the notes at 1 Cor 10:11).

Paul continues in v. 10 with an expansion of the illustration of the harvest of crops and the ox. Paul moves the illustration beyond the ox by inserting the expectations of the laborers who are involved in such a harvest. Both the one who plows and the one who threshes do so, Paul affirms, in the hope of reaping the material benefit from their tasks. This verse allows the apostle to expand the illustration and metaphors beyond the bare elements found in Deut 25:4 in order to make a more pointed application in the next verse.

9:11 If we have sown spiritual seed among you, is it too much if we reap a material harvest from you?

Just as verse 10 enlarged the illustration from the preceding verse, so also in 9:11 Paul enlarges the elements of the illustration beyond that of the preceding verse. In all probability Paul embellished this cluster of metaphors to include the sowing of seed in order to make a more direct connection to a metaphor which depicted his own apostolic ministry. While we cannot know with certainty whether Paul knew of Jesus' parable of the seed and sower (Matt 13), we do know from 1 Cor 3:6 that Paul regarded his ministry at Corinth as one of planting seed in God's field. The paradigm of spiritual seed (pneumatikaÉ ejspeivramen, pneumatika espeiramen ) and material harvest (sarkikaÉ qerivsomen, sarkika therisomen ) is closely analogous to Paul's paradigm of spiritual blessings and material blessings which he addressed a few months later to the church in Rome (Rom 15:27).

9:12 If others have this right of support from you, shouldn't we have it all the more? But we did not use this right. On the contrary, we put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel of Christ.

In this verse Paul's argumentation and rhetoric takes an unexpected turn. As Witherington observed,

one would expect the next line to be a request by Paul for his rights to material support to be honored. But in fact in the period 12b, Paul turns around and says that he also has the right not to make use of such support, sustenance, or patronage. Paul sees the receiving of ongoing support and patronage as a possible hindrance to the preaching of the gospel.

Paul uses this important term "right" (ejxousiva , exousia ) two times in this verse. Paul insists that he and others have the "right" to receive support from the Corinthians, but then acknowledges that he does not use this right. By this acknowledgment, Paul is setting himself forward as an example to the Corinthians to encourage them to surrender rights and freedoms that they have in the gospel, but which have counterproductive consequences among the believers at Corinth. If the apostle can put up with anything rather than hinder the gospel, it is his hope that the readership at Corinth will endure their loss of privileges rather than hindering the gospel among those who are weak in terms of food offered to idols. Accordingly, we see that for Paul an unloving act which caused a weaker brother to be ruined, even if predicated on doctrinal monotheism, is tantamount to the hindrance of the gospel.

9:13 Don't you know that those who work in the temple get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in what is offered on the altar?

In this verse Paul shifts again to another cluster of images used to underscore the point that those who "sow the seed of the gospel" have every right to be compensated for this effort. Although it would not make much difference in the point of Paul's argument here, there is a debate among scholars whether Paul has reference here to the converts' awareness of practices in pagan temples or a possible awareness they might have about the practices of the temple in Jerusalem. Paul's point is true in either case. Interpreters who believe that Paul must be referring to Old Testament Levitical practices include Simon Kistemaker, and John Calvin who noted, "an argument derived from the custom of the heathen, would certainly have been a poor one, for the revenues of the priests were not devoted to necessities like food and clothing, but to costly furnishings, regal splendor and extravagant luxury." C.K. Barrett, on the other hand, states that Paul may be making a reference to practices in idolatrous temples. It seems best to conclude that the evidence from 9:13 is insufficient for one to be dogmatic about this question.

We can say with certainty though that Calvin's interpretation is flawed when he says that pagan temples did not have the practice of their priests eating from the food that had been offered. There is far too much ancient literary and archaeological evidence that proves just the opposite. Fee correctly points out that Paul's point in 9:13 is abundantly clear whether one assumes a Jewish or pagan background for the imagery of working in the temple and serving at the altar. He also observes that the Greek word for "serve" (paredreuvw, paredreuô) in 9:13b is found no other place in the New Testament nor in the Greek Old Testament, and is typically found in pagan authors who are referring to the work of pagan priests.

9:14 In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.

By his use of the phrase "in the same way," Paul makes clear that he wants to take the imagery and practices found in first century cultic activity and apply those metaphorically to those who work and serve in the planting and reaping of the gospel. The majority of New Testament scholars recognize the fact that the texts of the New Testament cannot be used to justify the modern clergy/laity distinction. Nevertheless, in 9:14 Paul does indicate that the apostles, i.e., those who preach the gospel, have been commanded by God to receive remuneration for their gift and ministry. It would be extremely difficult to demonstrate that Paul believed every other Christian ministry was designated by God as one worthy of financial compensation. In light of Paul's theology of gifts (see especially 1 Cor 12:28-30), it is hard to imagine that he would have used a phrase like "those who preach the gospel" (toi'" toÉ eujaggevlion kataggevllousin, tois to evangelion katangellousin ) to describe the Christian activity of countless other believers in the ancient church. The only thing that probably would have seemed as foreign to Paul as the later clergy/laity distinction is an idea that every believer is a missionary. But for apostles, Paul argues in this context, God has commanded that they have the right to receive payment for their work in the proclamation of the gospel.

3. Paul's Deferment of Rights (9:15-18)

¹⁵ But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me. I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast. ¹⁶ Yet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! ¹⁷ If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me. ¹⁸ What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make use of my rights in preaching it.

9:15 But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me. I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast.

Even though the Greek text does not contain the word "rights," Fee is correct in arguing that this is surely the point Paul is making at this juncture. The apostle is apparently undisturbed by the fact that he refuses to go along with that which God, according to 9:14, had commanded. Just as Paul had been able in 8:1-3 to exalt the virtues of love over the virtues of correct doctrine misused, so also in 9:15. Paul is able to arrive at a decision which allows him to decline the normal method for compensation in order to achieve a higher good.

Paul was certainly not against receiving compensation in certain situations and he was surely not beyond receiving gifts from fellow believers. Nevertheless, in the historical and cultural realities of the Corinthian setting Paul realized that to accept compensation from them would be, in the words of 9:12, a hindrance to the gospel of Christ. The sensitivity of this issue in the context of Paul's ministry among the Corinthians is made apparent by the continuing references to it in 2 Cor 10-13.

In this verse Paul denies that he is trying to either shame or manipulate his readers into now beginning to give him compensation; quite the contrary. He states in fact that he would rather die than have anyone deprive him of his grounds for boasting (kauvchma, kauchçma). The details of Paul's argumentation in 9:15b have often struck commentators as quite difficult to follow. Not only are there abnormalities in the Greek text, but there are points at which Paul's reasoning takes the reader by surprise. Paul's introduction of the term "boast" at the end of 9:15 is very significant. In fact, it is this concept of boasting which serves as a catalyst for what Paul will express in the following verses.

9:16 Yet when I preach the gospel, I cannot boast, for I am compelled to preach. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!

In this verse Paul clarifies what the grounds of his boasting are. He states explicitly that preaching the gospel is not grounds of his boasting. The reason that preaching is disqualified as a reason to boast is because he must preach out of necessity. Paul's reasoning says that there is nothing virtuous in performing the ministry received from God because that was what he was commanded to do. Moreover, Paul is so convinced about the divine mandate that lies behind his apostolic preaching that he pronounces a woe upon himself (oujaiÉ gavr moiv ejstin, ouai gar moi estin ) if he were to fail to follow God's commandment in this matter.

9:17 If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me.

At this point Paul drops the terminology of boast and pursues the conceptually related term "reward" (misqovn, misthon ). Paul uses two brief logical arguments in 9:17 to help the Corinthians understand his distinction between preaching with compensation and preaching without compensation. In the first case Paul refers to voluntary preaching, which he himself does not do since, according to 9:16, he is compelled to preach and would be punished by God if he did not. In such an instance when one preaches voluntarily Paul acknowledges that there is a reward. This individual, using earlier terminology, would be able to boast of his preaching activity. In the second instance Paul refers to someone whose preaching is not voluntary. This illustration would point to Paul's own situation. When one's life of preaching is not voluntary, then that person has no reward but is discharging the duty given to him by God.

9:18 What then is my reward? Just this: that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make use of my rights in preaching it.

The logical conclusion of the two examples mentioned in 9:17 is that Paul does not have a reward. This leads then to the question at the opening of 9:18, what then is the reward that Paul has since he preaches involuntarily? The reward that the apostle Paul has (=the boast that the apostle Paul has) is namely that he preaches the gospel without remuneration from the Corinthians.

Paul brings his reasoning and argumentation in the preceding several verses to its culmination by his use of the word "my rights" in 9:18. Gordon Fee rightly points out that part of Paul's emphasis at the end of 9:18 is missed by the unfortunate translation made by the NIV. The NIV phrase "make use of my rights in preaching it" would be more accurately rendered "make use of my right in the gospel." Paul's wording is in fact much more appropriate to the contextual situation. Those puffed up believers whose behavior Paul criticizes in chapter 8 were claiming their "right" in the gospel, not their rights in preaching it. Consequently Paul's argumentation needs to demonstrate that he himself has been willing to jettison "his right in the gospel" and not his right in preaching it. Those believers whose correct monotheistic doctrine had led them to be puffed up rather than be concerned about edifying the weaker brother would surely have claimed that their "right" to act in this way existed because of the truth of the monotheistic gospel. Accordingly, it is at this very point in the examination of one's right(s) in the gospel that Paul needed to respond to them.

4. To the Jew as a Jew (9:19-23)

¹⁹ Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. ²⁰ To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. ²¹ To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. ²² To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. ²³ I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

9:19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible.

This verse introduces the very important section of 9:19-23. At the outset it must be noticed that this section has sometimes been misused to justify a variety of ill-conceived and theologically flawed missiological perspectives and decisions. Anyone who believes that these verses prove that the apostle Paul's strategy and style make him resemble a chameleon has failed to see the rhetorical and occasional nature of this material. Even a superficial reading of the first Corinthian letter makes it abundantly clear that Paul is no chameleon. It is interesting to notice, for example, that in this list of groups to whom he is willing to accommodate himself in verses 20-22 one does not find a reference to those who have knowledge.

There are an adequate number of examples in this very letter to demonstrate that Paul could be anything but accommodating in specific instances where he had fundamental disagreements with either the aberrant lifestyle or unacceptable doctrine of fellow believers. If one takes this section out of its rhetorical setting in which Paul is defensively attempting to rescue falling believers (1 Cor 8:13), one derives a picture of Paul that can stand up neither to the evidence in the Pauline letters nor to the evidence concerning Paul's methods portrayed in the book of Acts.

With this affirmation of his own personal freedom Paul reconnects with the terminology he used at the beginning of this chapter in 9:1. The strength of Paul's affirmation in 9:19 comes from his use of radical dichotomies. On the one hand he is free and belongs to no one, while on the other hand he chooses to enslave himself to everyone. Paul is very clear when he states the goal or purpose of this self-enslavement. The agenda that leads to this lifestyle comes from his vision and commitment to his apostolic calling. His desire is to win as many as possible. Because of the importance of the term "win" in the section 9:19-23, it is necessary to make a brief comment on the meaning of this term (kerdaivnw, kerdainô). Even though this term kerdainô carries with it the general idea of "gain" or "win," the most contextually insightful evidence comes from the parallelism between this verb and the verb save in 9:22. Because of this parallelism between the verb to save (swvzw, sôzô) and the verb to win, it is best to understand to win in the sense of to facilitate or encourage the salvation of someone else.

9:20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law.

Keeping in mind the situation and context of this chapter, we remember that Paul's underlying concern is to rescue the saints who are weak in conscience so that their relationship to God and Christ will not be destroyed. (See notes on 8:11-13). Accordingly, as Paul makes his way in verse 20 through a list of various groups whom he attempts to evangelize, such as Jews, those under the law, and those outside the law, we must not lose sight of the fact that the goal of this argumentation is to lead the reader to 9:22 where Paul mentions individuals who are weak. Contextually Paul can have no one else in mind by his reference to the weak other than the threatened brothers under discussion throughout 1 Cor 8.

There have been many attempts by interpreters of Paul to find specific instances, particularly in the book of Acts, which would demonstrate Paul's ability to become a Jew in order to win the Jews. One must be careful, however, not to assume that the Corinthian readership would have known about all the examples in the book of Acts which the modern reader of the New Testament knows about, obviously including those events in Acts which had not even occurred by the time of Paul's writing this letter to the Corinthians.

The historical question that arises immediately from 9:20 is how does someone who is already a Jew like Paul become a Jew in order to win the Jews? Fee is clearly correct when he answers this question in these words, "the obvious answer is, in matters that have to do with Jewish religious peculiarities that Paul as a Christian had long ago given up as essential to a right relationship with God."

Numerous interpreters agree that Paul's reference to those under the law in 9:20 is especially enigmatic. The major difficulty is to determine what group Paul has in mind by this phrase. There would be no problem if Paul referred either to the Jews or to those under the law, but the question arises because he refers to both. How does Paul distinguish between these two groups? None of the traditional explanations for this enigma are problem free. What the apostle probably has in mind is the fact that ancient Judaism was composed of Jews who were more law conscious than other Jews were. From this perspective the term Jew might have more racial or national characteristics associated with it, while the phrase "those under the law" would point to Jews whose zeal for the law was far more rigid. In this regard it is noteworthy that in Paul's autobiographical descriptions of his life before Christ in Judaism he acknowledges that not all Jews had the same level of interest and intense zeal for the law (Phil 3:6; Gal 1:14).

It is very helpful to the modern interpreter of Paul to read Paul's acknowledgment that he himself is no longer under the law (uJpoÉ novmon, hypo nomon ). This does not mean, of course, that Paul did not believe in the authority and the normative character of the Old Testament Scriptures (cf. 2 Tim 3:16; Rom 15:4). This latter fact is abundantly clear throughout the book of Corinthians (see notes on 1 Cor 10:11).

9:21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law.

The phrase "those not having the law" (toi'" ajnovmoi", tois anomois ) surely refers to the Gentile mission. Even though there were ways in which Paul would accommodate himself to the Gentile mission, he is quick to point out that he did not live lawlessly as a servant of Christ. In fact, even though Paul was not, according to v. 20, under the law, v. 21 makes it clear that he is not free from Christ's law. It would be a great travesty for someone to imagine that Paul's gospel was a lawless gospel. Clearly Paul was not interested in imposing aspects of Mosaic ceremonial legislation upon Gentile believers (e.g., Galatians, Romans, Philippians), but his letters, including 1 Corinthians, make it very clear that Paul is committed to a people of God who stand under the regulations and laws of Christ. The purpose of this accommodation to the Gentiles, Paul says, is to win those who have had no history of association with the historic people of God.

9:22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.

Those Corinthian Jews and Gentiles who were now saved because of Paul's ability "to become all things to all people" will have to face the consequences of that Pauline strategy in terms of Paul's present loyalty to the weak (toi'" asqenevsin, tois asthenesin ). It is one thing for a Jew or Gentile convert at Corinth to applaud Paul's commitment to adaptability in winning new converts, but it is quite another to continue this applause as this principle requires the surrender of rights and freedoms in their new relationship to Christ.

It is no accident then that Paul's accommodation to the weak is found at the end of this presentation, with the very missionary principles which led to the success of the Pauline mission in cities like Corinth now being brought to bear on internal problems among members of the church. When Paul says he became weak to the weak he is obviously referring to the weak believers mentioned in chapter 8. A concrete example of this accommodation to the weak was already established by Paul in 8:13 when he says that he would never eat meat again if it would cause a weak Christian to lose his salvation.

This verse ends with a comprehensive statement of the principle that has guided Paul in the specific actions mentioned in 9:19-22. The apostle states in very unguarded terminology his adaptability to all people in all circumstances so that some might experience salvation. Since it is the very salvation of the weak that concerns Paul, it is appropriate that he refers to the goal of salvation in the context of the weak.

9:23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

The gospel is the only legitimate foundation for Paul's encouragement for others to defer to the weak. He states here that all the abdication of personal rights and prerogatives mentioned in the preceding verses are to be understood as part of his response to the gospel (diaÉ toÉ eujaggevlion, dia to euangelion ). Kistemaker commented on this verse in these words:

We would expect Paul to be the loser when he announced his intention to be a servant of all those who wanted to listen to the gospel. Paul is not the loser but the beneficiary of the blessings that accompany the preaching of the good news.

5. Looking Forward to the Prize (9:24-27)

²⁴ Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. ²⁵ Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. ²⁶ Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. ²⁷ No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.

9:24 Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize.

Interpreters of 1 Corinthians have not been of one mind in their understanding about the relationship between 9:24-27 to the verses that precede it, as well as its relationship to the section found in 10:1-22. In light of the athletic metaphors which dominate in 9:24-27 and the fact that 10:1ff is focused on the disqualification that some of the Corinthian believers may experience, it seems to be a judicious conclusion to interpret 9:24-27 as an introduction to the thoughts found in 10:1ff.

As we have seen in other sections of 1 Corinthians when Paul has stern comments to make to his readers, he often inserts illustrations in the first person singular, so that he speaks autobiographically. A similar phenomenon can be seen in the section 9:24-27. Paul is not unique in his use of athletic imagery to encourage those whom he mentors to struggle and persevere in a life of excellence and faithfulness. Similar illustrations can be found in Jewish writers of the period as well as in several Stoic or Cynic popular philosophers of the early Roman empire. It should be obvious that the point of the illustration in 9:24 is not to affirm that only one individual will receive the prize of eternal life. Rather, Paul's intention is to point out the obvious fact that mere participation in the race is not the same as receiving the prize that goes to the victor. Accordingly, Paul challenges his readership to participate in the race in a way that will insure that they will receive the prize.

The obvious implication of this section is that Paul recognizes, and in fact fears, the possibility that certain Corinthian believers may run in such a way that they will not receive the prize. Since this rather straightforward meaning of the text has caused difficulty to certain theological systems, Fee raises the question whether Paul could actually be teaching what it sounds like he is teaching. Fee states that some interpreters cannot believe that Paul is teaching that believers could fail to obtain the prize. He then observes that they usually come to this conclusion "because of prior theological commitment, not because of what the text itself says."

9:25 Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever.

A key phrase in the first half of 9:25 is the phrase "goes into strict training" (ejgkrateuvetai, enkrateuetai ). This phrase is one of the indications that this section is conceptually linked to the issues Paul will attempt to deal with in 10:1ff, namely, the lack of spiritually robust training in the life of some of the Corinthian believers. One observes again and again in the life of Paul that he never places requirements upon his converts which he himself does not fulfill. Accordingly, after acknowledging the necessity of strict training, he demonstrates how his own life is characterized by this strict training.

While crowns were not the only form of reward received by victors in ancient athletic competition, they were a very common form of prize that signified one's victory. While some victorious athletes of antiquity received crowns of gold, many times victorious competitors received wreaths made of various parts of trees and vegetation. These crowns clearly would not last forever. It is at this juncture that Paul makes a contrast between the crown that human athletes receive, which is short-lived, and the crown the believer wins that lasts forever.

Paul's words in the last part of 9:25 contain a purpose clause (i{na, hina ) which makes a clear connection between the disciplined life that Paul both leads and encourages others to lead and his desire for a crown that will last forever. The apostle Paul's motivation to persevere in the calling he had received from God was certainly a multisided motivation. Paul obviously did not rely on any single perspective or motivation. What we see in this context, however, is a clear reference to a motivation that is rooted in his anticipation of receiving an eternal reward from God, spoken of metaphorically here as crown that is imperishable.

9:26 Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air.

Because the apostle has fixed his vision steadfastly upon receiving this imperishable crown, he does not take his strict training lightheartedly. Even though runners in ancient athletic competition would obviously not be characterized as running aimlessly, Paul is aware that this image fits well the life of some of his readers. As this illustration pointedly underscores, aimless running has never led to a crown. Therefore, the apostle refuses to conduct himself in any way that would disqualify him from this imperishable crown. He then shifts the metaphor from that of a runner to a metaphor of a boxer. There has been more than one interpretation of the point of Paul's metaphor of a man beating the air. Perhaps the best interpretation is that given by Witherington. He points out that this image of a shadow boxer was used in antiquity to negatively describe one's philosophic opponents. The first-century Greek-Jewish author Philo, for example, calls some of the sophists of his day shadow boxers. The imagery of a boxer merely throwing punches in the air is certainly analogous to the other image of a runner running aimlessly.

9:27 No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.

In this verse it is imperative to understand that Paul is still speaking metaphorically. The apostle's choice of the words "I beat my body" is best explained by the fact that he is continuing to use metaphors that depict rigor in athletic competition. During the centuries-long history of Christianity, there have been schools of interpretation which took Paul's words at face value and attempted to emulate what they believed he was encouraging others to do. John Calvin noted in this regard, "the monks of long ago, wanting to comply with this direction, thought out many disciplinary exercises; for they used to sleep on benches; they forced themselves to keep unduly long night vigils; and, in their way of life, kept clear of all luxuries." The apostle's point is to affirm the fact that in his own life he strives hard to make sure that he practices self-control and makes himself a slave. Even though the words of 9:27 express the idea that Paul recognizes the possibility that he himself might be disqualified for the prize, some interpreters have found this impossible to believe. It is important for the modern interpreter of 9:27 to keep in mind the literary function of Paul's autobiographical comments in this verse. He is offering himself as a model to the Corinthian readership. He can hardly expect them to take seriously this need for a life of strict training and the possibility of disqualification if he does not subject himself to those same truths and realities. As Witherington noted in his observations about Paul's point here, "it is quite clear that Paul considers it possible for him and his audience to lose the crown if they do not follow the law of Christ."

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

McGarvey: 1Co 9:1

[False or factional teachers coming to Corinth expected to be supported by the church according to the usual custom, but were hampered by the example of Paul, who had taken nothing for his services. To justify themselves and to discredit Paul, some of them appear to have gone so far as to deny Paul's appointment as an apostle, and to use his failure to demand wages as an evidence of their assertion. They argued that he knew he was not an apostle, and so forbore through shame to ask an apostle's pay. To settle this controversy, the Corinthians asked some such question as this: "Explain why, being an apostle, you did not take the wages due you as such." Paul begins his answer with four questions which show both surprise and indignation.] Am I not free? [All free men were entitled to wages for work done. Only slaves worked without compensation. See 1Co 9:19] Am I not an apostle? [and so more entitled to wages than an ordinary, less approved Christian teacher.] Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? [Apostles were to be witnesses of Jesus' resurrection (Act 1:22 ; Act 2:32 ; Act 10:4), and so it was necessary that they should have seen the risen Christ. But Paul had seen more; on the way to Damascus, not only the risen, but the glorified, Christ had appeared to him. This was Paul's first proof of apostleship.] Are not ye my work in the Lord? [The presence of a church in Corinth, having in it Christians converted by Paul and living in the Lord, was the second proof of his apostleship. Such work could not be done by impostors -- Mat 7:15-20]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:2

If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you; for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord . [An argumentum ad hominem. Whatever Paul might be in the estimation of Judaizers and enemies, he must still be held as an apostle by those who owed their spiritual life to him, for if he were no apostle, they were no Christians, and vice versa. As the seal vouched for the genuineness and validity of the document to which it was attached, so these Corinthian converts by their existence vouched for Paul's apostleship.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:3

My defence to them that examine me is this . [This verse refers to what precedes it. It means that when called to defend his apostleship, Paul would point to the presence of a church of his established in Corinth as his answer. A similar answer had satisfied the other apostles (Gal 2:6-10) Thus having proved his apostleship, Paul proceeds to discuss the rights and privileges appurtenant to it.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:4

Have we no right to eat and to drink? [are we not entitled to be fed by the church?]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:5

Have we no right to lead about [in our constant journeyings] a wife that is a believer [i. e., a lawful wife; it was unlawful to marry an unbeliever -- 2Co 6:14-16], even as the rest of the apostles [this passage creates a fair presumption that at least the majority of the apostles were married], and the brethren of the Lord [For their names see Mat 13:55 . For their relation to Jesus, see "Fourfold Gospel," pp. 119, 224-226], and Cephas? [This apostle was married (Mat 8:14); yet Catholics claim him as the first pope. If all these apostles were allowed maintenance for themselves and their wives, Paul had equal right to demand that the church support his wife had he chosen to marry.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:6

Or I only and Barnabas [Though not one of the twelve, he is called an apostle (Act 14:14), for he was a messenger or apostle of the Holy Spirit, and of the church at Antioch (Act 13:2) and was associated with Paul (Gal 2:9). His name was illustrious enough at Corinth to give countenance to Paul's course. If Barnabas and Paul wrought out their self-support to be nobly independent, did their voluntary sacrifice of rights abolish those rights, or prove that they never existed? This late reference to Barnabas is interesting, for it shows that he was still at work and was still loved of Paul despite their disagreement concerning John Mark. Having thus proved his right to maintenance by the example of other church leaders, Paul now goes on to give an argument in six heads showing that the practice of these leaders was wholly lawful and proper. First argument: Wages for service is the rule in all employment; in proof of this, three instances are cited, the soldier, the vine-dresser, the shepherd], have we not a right to forbear working?

McGarvey: 1Co 9:7

What soldier ever serveth at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [In the East, vine-dressers and shepherds are still thus paid in kind. Work without wages would foster rascality, and it is therefore an unhealthy principle to use in church matters. Second argument: The law of Moses allowed wages for work.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:8

Do I speak these things after the manner of men? or saith not the law also the same? [Paul asks these two questions to show that while he has appealed to human authority, he has also divine authority for the principle which he asserts.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:9

For it is written in the law of Moses [Deu 25:4], Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn . [Grain in the East has never been threshed by machinery. Though flails are used, it is usually threshed out by oxen. These are driven over it to tramp out the grain, and they sometimes draw a small sled or threshing instrument after them. The law forbade the muzzling of an ox thus employed, and in the East this law is still obeyed.] Is it for the oxen that God careth ,

McGarvey: 1Co 9:10

or saith he it assuredly for our sake? Yea, for our sake it was written: because he that ploweth ought to plow in hope, and he that thresheth, to thresh in hope of partaking . [Those fond of carping and caviling have attempted to use this passage to prove that Paul asserts that God does not care for animals. Such a view is abundantly contradicted by Scripture (Job 38:41 ; Psa 147:9 ; Mat 6:26 ; Luk 12:24). Paul's meaning is clear. In giving the law, God's proximate design was to care for oxen, but his ultimate design was to enforce the principle that labor should not go unrewarded; that each workman might discharge his task in cheerful expectation that he would receive wages for his employment. Paul asserts that God does not legislate for oxen and forget men. It is an argument a minori ad magnus, such as Christ himself employed (Mat 6:26-30) Third argument: The law of exchange demands an equivalent for value received.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:11

If we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things? [What was earthly support in comparison with the riches of the gospel? If Paul had demanded his full carnal recompense, it would have been a meager compensation for blessings and benefits which can never be weighed in dollars and cents. Fourth argument: The concessions which you have made in supporting others having inferior claims debar you from thus denying apostolic claims.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:12

If others partake of this right over you, do not we yet more? Nevertheless we did not use this right; but we bear all things, that we may cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ . [Since Paul had left Corinth, other teachers had been supported by the church, and this stopped them from denying Paul's right to support. The apostle had not used this right, for to do so would have hindered him in planting the church. It would retard the progress of any movement to demand salaries under it before demonstrating that it was either beneficent or necessary. To have demanded maintenance subsequently would have given Paul's enemies a chance to impugn his motives, and say that he labored for earthly gain. Fifth argument: Priests, whose office, like the apostolic, is purely sacred, are universally maintained by sharing in the sacrifices which they offer.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:13

Know ye not that they that minister about sacred things eat of the things of the temple [the offerings, etc.], and they that wait upon the altar have their portion with the altar? [Num 18:8-13 ; Deu 8:1 . Sixth argument: Christ himself ordained that ministers should be supported by those whom they serve.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:14

Even so did the Lord ordain that they that proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel . [Mat 10:10 ; Luk 10:7 . This precept was all which Paul needed to urge. He no doubt elaborated this argument that the Corinthians might be fully convinced that he was perfectly aware of his rights at the time when he waived them. The apostle next sets forth more fully why he preferred to support himself rather than receive compensation from the churches.]

McGarvey: 1Co 9:15

But I have used none of these things [i. e., these rights]: and I write not these things that it may be so done in my case [Paul had a right to receive wages for his labor, and this right was guaranteed both by the customs of the people and the law of Moses; he also had a right to some recompense as an equivalent for the blessings which he bestowed. Moreover, he had a right to receive as fair treatment as that bestowed upon others. Again, he had a right as a man engaged in sacred affairs to be paid by those who enjoyed his services, and lastly as a minister of Christ, the law of Christ, demanded that he be supported. Paul had urged none of these rights, nor did he now assert them that he might shame the Corinthians for their neglect or prepare them to change their conduct toward him when he visited them as he intended]; for it were good for me rather to die, than that any man should make my glorying void . [So far from desiring pay from the Corinthians, he preferred to die rather than receive it, for to do so would deprive him of the glory and joy of preaching the gospel without earthly reward. By denying himself wages, Paul obtained free access to all men, and could found new churches. He gloried in the salvation of souls and in the honoring of Christ.]

Lapide: 1Co 9:1-27

CHAPTER 9

SYNOPSIS OF THE CHAPTER

i. He proceeds to show by his own example how offences are to be avoided, and he says that he had refused to accept payment, or the maintenance due to a preacher of the Gospel, both to gain greater merit and for the sake of edification.

ii. He then (ver. 7) proves by six arguments (summarised on the notes to ver. 12) that this maintenance is due to himself and other preachers of the Gospel.

iii. He shows (ver, 20) that for the same reason he had become all things to all men, that the Corinthians might learn how each one must care for his own edification and the salvation of his neighbour.

iv. He urges them (ver. 24) to that same edification, pointing out that our life is a race and trial of virtue, and in them we must run and strive after better things, and after the prize, buy abstinence and bodily mortification.

Ver. 1.— Am I not an apostle? am I not free? It may be asked what connection this has with the preceding chapter: it seems to be an abrupt transition to another subject. I reply that Paul had spoken at the end of the last chapter of the necessity of avoiding all that might cause offence. Now, that he may enforce this, he puts himself forward as an example, and points to his having refused to receive any payment for his preaching, and his having earned his bread by his own labours; this cession of his rights he made, both to void causing any to offend, and to give an example of singular virtue. He would so teach the Corinthians not to stand upon their rights, especially in the matter of eating idol-sacrifices, out of regard for their neighbours, if they saw that they were thus made to stumble, or led into sin. Yet at the same time Paul, by implication, guards in this declaration the sincerity and authority of his preaching against the false apostles who impugned them; he points indirectly to his having preached the Gospel without money and without price, while the false apostles made gain out of it. He says therefore: "Am I not an Apostle? am I not free? Am I not within my rights, as the Apostle of Christ, if I demand and receive from you means for my maintenance? Yet this I do not so, because I wish to show you what our neighbour's salvation demands from us, and how you ought, therefore, to avoid all causes of offence." Cf. Chrysostom's homily on this text (No. 20).

Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are not ye my work in the Lord? It is clear that I am an Apostle, for I have seen Christ, and been sent by Him to preach the Gospel. Cf. Act 9:5; Act 22:18.

Ye are my work in the Lord, because I begat you by the Gospel in Christ. Your Church was built up by me: ye are my building.

Ver. 2.— For the seal of mine Apostleship are ye in the Lord. A proof of my apostleship may be seen in you, in my preaching, in my miracles, in the toil and the dangers which I have either borne or performed amongst you for your conversion; by such things as by Divine seals have I sealed, confirmed, and proved my apostleship. All these things loudly testify that I am a true Apostle, sent by God to teach and save you.

Ver. 3.— Mine answer to them that do examine me is this, Those who ask about my Apostleship may take what I have said as their answer. So Anselm. But Chrysostom and Ambrose just as suitably refer this to the following verse.

To examine of interrogate in a judicial term, and is purposely used by S. Paul to point to the audacity of those who called in question his jurisdiction.

Ver. 4.— Have we not power to eat and to drink? Viz., at your expense. This is the glory and defence of me and my apostleship, that it is gratuitous, unlike that of the false apostles. Notwithstanding I have the same right, the same power to look for means from you for my eating and drinking.

Ver. 5.— Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles? The Greek is ảδελφὴν γυναξκα, which the Latin version turns mulierem sororem ; and Beza, Peter Martyr, Vatablus, and Valle render sororem uxorem. They argue from this that Paul was married, urging that, though the Greek word stands both for woman and wife, yet here its meaning is fixed to the latter by the term "lead about." Men do not, they say, lead about sisters but wives.

They mistake: 1. Christ led about women, not as a husband might a wife, but as a teacher is accompanied by disciples and handmaidens, who see to his necessities. Cf. Luk 8:3.

2. It would be absurd to call a sister a wife, and the term sister would be superfluous.

3. The definite article is wanting in the Greek, which would be required if a certain woman, as, e.g., a wife, were designated.

4. It is evident from 1 Cor. vii. 8 that Paul was unmarried. This passage is explained at length is the sense I have given by Augustine ( de Opere Monach. c. iv.), Jerome ( contra Jovin. lib. i.), Chrysostom, Ambrose, Theodoret, Theophylact in their comments on the verse, and by other Fathers generally, except by Clement of Alexandria ( Strom, lib. iii.) S. Jerome indeed says that, among the Apostles, Peter was the only one that had a wife, and that only before his conversion. Tertullian's words ( de Monogamia ) are: "I find that Peter alone was a husband."

I say, then, that the phrase here is literally "sister woman," and denotes a Christian matron who ministered to Paul's necessities from her means. We have a similar phrase in Acts xiii. 26, "men brethren," i.e., Christian men. S. Paul says then that he might, if he so saw fit, lead about a matron to support him, as much as Peter; but he does not do so, because it might be a cause of offence to the Gentiles, whose Apostle he was, and might only cause evil surmisings. So Ambrose, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Œcumenius, Anselm.

It may be said that Ignatius, in his letter to the Philadelphians, classes Paul among the married. Baronius (A.D. 57, p. 518) and others well reply that Paul's name was inserted there by later Greek copyists, to serve as an excuse for themselves being married. The oldest and best copies of the Epistles of S. Ignatius, including that of the Vatican and of Sfort, have not S. Paul's name.

It may be said again that Clement of Alexandria ( Strom. lib. iii.) understands this passage of a wife of Paul. I reply, firstly, that that is true, but that he goes on to say that after he became an Apostle she was to him as a sister, not as a wife, which is against the heretics, and in the second place that all the Fathers are against Clement.

And the Brethren of the Lord. Brethren is a common Hebraism for kinsmen. James, John, and Judas are here meant. So Anselm.

And Cephas. Nay, as well as Peter, the prince of the Apostles and of the Church.

Ver. 7.— Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? Just as it is right for soldiers to be paid and to live in their pay; just as it is right for a vine-grower to eat of the fruit of his vine, for a shepherd of the milk of the flock that he feeds, so is it right for the preachers of the Gospel to live of the Gospel, of their vineyard the Church, and of their flock, the members of Christ. The Apostle is beginning here to prove in various ways his right to receive payment for his preaching, that all after him might know that this is owing to preachers of the Word of God, and that he may show how undeniable and how clear is the right that he has freely given up by refusing to receive payment out of regard to the Corinthians. He so acted in order that by this generosity of his he might draw them to Christ and help forward their salvation. I will summarise his reasons at ver. 12.

Ver. 8.— Say I these things as a man? Do I prove or strengthen my arguments by human reasons merely, and by similitudes drawn from the life of the soldier, the vine-grower, the shepherd. By no means. Nay, rather I establish and fortify them from the law of God.

Ver. 9.— For it is written in the law of Moses, &c. Deu 25:4. The reason doubtless was that it was right that the animals who laboured should also eat. Hence God forbade that the mouths of the oxen that trod out the corn should be muzzled, to prevent them from eating of what they trod out. It was the custom in Palestine, as it is now in some places, for the oxen to thresh out the grain by treading the corn-ears with their hoofs. That this is the literal meaning appears from the words in which it is enjoined on the hard-hearted Jews.

It may be objected that the Apostle seems here to exclude this meaning, by saying, "Doth God take care for oxen?" Abulensis, commenting in Deut. xxv., says that the literal sense of the verse is twofold: (1.) It refers to oxen, as has just been said, but not principally; (2.) The sense which is uppermost and chiefly intended by the Holy Spirit is that given by the Apostle here when he speaks of preachers. God, he says, takes care for oxen in the second place, but for teachers in the first; and therefore it is more the literal sense of the injunction that preachers should be maintained than that oxen should. But it is evident that the first only of these two is the literal sense. For the word ox denotes a preacher typically only, and not literally. Otherwise the literal sense would be wholly allegorical, which is absurd. For the literal sense is that which is the first meaning of any sentence; the allegorical or typical is that which is derived from the literal. As then the shadow of a body is not the body itself, so the typical sense cannot be the literal, but is merely shadowed forth by the literal.

The literal meaning therefore if the verse in Deuteronomy is that which I have given, but the mystical is that which is given by the Apostle, that preachers must be maintained, and that they are to live of the Gospel, just as the ox is fed on what he treads out; and since God's chief care is for the former, the mystical meaning of the text is, as the Apostle says, the one that is uppermost.

Notice that it is a matter of faith that God takes care for oxen: for by His providence He cares for the sparrows (S. Matt. x. 29), and for the young ravens that call upon Him (Psa 147:9), and for all animals, as the Psalmist frequently says, and especially throughout Psalm civ. The Apostle means, therefore, that in this precept God's chief care was not for oxen, but for preachers like S. Paul, who are like oxen in labouring and treading out the corn in the Lord's field and threshing-floor, and are to be allowed to live of the Gospel.

Ver. 10.— Or saith He it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes no doubt this is written. The argument is here, as so often in S. Paul's writings, from the mystical, not the literal sense; or rather it is an à fortiori argument from the literal to the mystical sense, thus: If the ox lives of what he treads out, much more may an Apostle live of the Gospel. Cf. Tertullian ( contra Marcion, lib. v. c. 7) and Theodoret (qu. xxi. in Deut.). Observe here that, though the literal sense in the first in time, yet the mystical is the first in importance, and the one chiefly intended by the Holy Spirit.

That he that ploweth should plow in hope. Just as those that plough and thresh do so in hope of being partakers of what is reaped and threshed out, so too the preacher may hope for suppoet because of his preaching. If this hope Ovid speaks ( Ep. ex Ponto, lib. i. vi. 30): "Hope it is that gives courage to the farmer, and intrusts the seeds to the ploughed-up furrows, to be returned with heavy interest by the kindly earth."

From this passage we may argue à fortiori that to work is hope of an eternal reward is an act of virtue, and that this act therefore is meritorious. Hence the Sorbonne, as Claudius Guiliandus testifies in his remarks on this passage, has defined as erroneous the proposition the "he that strives for the sake of a reward, and would not strive unless he know that a reward would be given, deprives himself of the reward." The Council of Trent has the same definition (Sess. vi. can. 31).

Ver. 12.— If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? The Apostle proves by six arguments that that he and other ministers of the Word of God and the Church may receive their expenses from their flocks: ( a ) By the examples of the other Apostles (ver. 5); ( b ) by comparisons drawn from the practice of soldiers, shepherds, and agriculturists (ver. 7); ( c ) from the law of Moses (ver. 9); ( d ) from the example of the priests and Levites of the Old Testament, who lived on the sacrifices offered on the altar that they served (ver. 13); ( e ) from the ordinance of God and of Christ (ver. 14); ( f ) from the very nature of the case, from the positive command of God, as well as from the law of mature, which declared that, as payment is due to a workman, so is support to a minister of the Word, not as the price of sacred things, which would be dishonouring to them and simoniacal, but as what is necessary for them to fitly discharge their sacred functions for the people's sake. Hence this support is owing to them as a matter of justice. So Chrysostom.

Nevertheless we have not used this power, but suffer all things. We have not claimed out right to maintenance, but endure the utmost poverty, and undertake every kind of evil to relieve that poverty by working with our hands.

Lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. He would not receive money for his support, lest he should give occasion to covetous or injudicious men to hinder the Gospel and bring obloquy upon it. That there was no cause of offence given here by the Apostle, but that it was received from others, and that it was in him a work of supererogation to refuse to receive payment, appears from what has gone before, and from ver. 15, where he says, "It were better for me to die than that any man should make my glorying void."

Ver. 13.—Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? The priests and Levites partake of the victims offered, and the tithes and firstfruits. The Greek for "minister" is "labour." The office of the priest was to labour at killing, cutting up, skinning, boiling, and burning the victims, all of which are laborious, and under other circumstances would be the work of butchers.

And they which wait at the altar. He does not say, says S. Chrysostom, the priests, but they which wait at the altar, that we may see that constant attendance of sacred things is required from the ministers of the temple of Christ, who partake of the good things of the Temple. On the other hand, now-a-days, none are less often at the altar than some who derive the greatest profit from the altar and from tithes. These are condemned by the Council of Trent.

Ver. 14.— Even so hath the Lord ordained. S. Luk 10:7; S. Mat 10:10-11, and Mat 10:14.

Ver. 15.— For it were better for me to die than that any man should make my glorying void. His glorying has for its subject the preaching of the Gospel without charge, or his work of liberality, free grace, and supererogation, as is evident from ver. 18. It appears from this that it is an Evangelical counsel to preach the Gospel without charge, as is now done by some apostolic and religious men. So Theophylact, Theodoret, and Anselm. Cf. also Chrysostom and Anselm.

Observe that S. Paul does not speak of his glory but his glorying, viz., that which he could make before God and before men, especially before the false apostles, who were held of great account and sumptuously maintained by the Corinthians. Cf. 2Co 11:7, for similar "glorying."

Ver. 16.— Woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel. It appears from this that strict injunctions were given to the Apostles (S. Mat 28:19) to preach the Gospel and teach all nations, insomuch that, if they had neglected to do so, they would have sinned mortally. For on those that neglect this their duty he pronounces the woe of the wrath of God and of hell. By the same injunctions all pasters, Bishops, and Archbishops are now bound. Cf. chap. i. 17.

Ver. 17.— For if I do this thing willingly I have a reward. That is, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Œcumenius, and Anselm say, if I freely preach without charge, I have not merely the reward given to a work that has been enjoined on me, as other Apostles have, but the exceeding reward of abounding glory given to a work not enjoined, but heroically undertaken by a soul that is of its own accord generous towards God.

But if against my will. Compelled by a command of God, or under fear of punishment. Willingly here denotes the doing a thing of one's own motion, one's own accord, and free will; unwillingly, the doing it under order, being moved and forced by the will of another.

A dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me. I shall not have that supreme glory I spoke of, but neither shall I sin, because I fulfil my duty, and do what I am ordered. For this commission of preaching the Gospel was intrusted to me. But though I do not sin, yet I act as a slave, or as a steward in matters intrusted to his care, not of his own accord, but merely doing what he ought to do, because compelled to it by his Lord's command. Cf. S. Luk 17:8. So the Fathers cited understand this passage, and that this is the meaning appears also from the context.

Some explain it differently in this way: If I preach the Gospel willingly I have merit and reward, because of my own free will I fulfil the command of Christ; but if I do it unwillingly, I fail to attain merit and reward, because I act under compulsion. A dispensation of the Gospel is committed unto me, and so by me, though unwilling, Christ's Gospel is propagated, and others profit, though I do not. This seems to be the simple meaning of the words by themselves. This explanation is favoured by S. Thomas, Lyranus, and the Ambrosian commentary; but the context requires the former sense.

Ver. 18.— What is my reward then? That glorious and supreme reward spoken of.

Observe that reward is put by metonymy for merit, or for a heroic and meritorious work, that calls for a great reward. This work, he goes of to say, is to preach the Gospel without charge.

From these words it is evident that not all good works are matters of precept, but that some are works of counsel and supererogation, and that such merit with God an illustrious crown of glory. So S. Chrysostom, Ambrose, S. Augustine ( de Opere Monach. c. 5), and Bellarmine ( de Monach. lib. ii. c. 9).

The other Apostles, being full of zeal for God, would as well as Paul have preached the Gospel freely, if they might thence have hoped for a greater harvest of souls, and greater glory before God. But this they might not hope for, for the faithful were generous to them, and the Jews devoted to them, and of their own accord they supplied their needs. Cf. Acts iv. 34. But Paul, as one outside the order and number of the twelve apostles, called to the apostolate after the death of Christ, had to gain a recognition of his authority, and he judged it useful to that end that he should preach the Gospel without charge. Moreover, the Corinthians, though rich, were covetous; and, therefore, Paul preached freely to prevent them from supposing that he sought their goods instead of themselves; but from the more generous Thessalonians and Philippians he accepted support. In short, Paul wished by this course of action to shut the mouth of the Jews, who hated him, and of the false Apostles. He says this indeed in 2Co 11:12.

That I abuse not my power in the Gospel. That I may not use my undoubted right and liberty to the detriment of the Gospel. Not that it really is an abuse to receive money for preaching he Gospel, but that it is the employment of a lesser good. Abuse is used here for use to the full, as it is in chap. vii. 31. Cf. a similar use of the word in S. Paulinus ( Ep. ii.).

It may be said that Ambrose here understands the word to mean literal abuse, which is sin, when he says: "They who use their right, when it is inexpedient to do so, or when another suffers loss, are guilty, and therefore sin." I reply that this is true when they can easily give up their right, and when others suffer great loss by their not yielding; for charity then bids us give way. These conditions, the Ambrosian commentary seems to think, existed with Paul and the Corinthians.

But the opposite is far more true. It was a very difficult matter for the Apostle to yield his right of maintenance at the hands of the Corinthians, because by so yielding he has to spend nights without sleep, while he laboured with his hands to procure food for himself and his companions; while the Corinthians, who were numerous and rich, might easily have maintained him. Nor ought they to have taken offence at this, for the other Apostles were maintained by their flocks, and all law and reason say that he who labours for another should be maintained by him. The Apostle, therefore, wished to set a noble example of poverty, sincerity, and zeal, for the greater commendation and spread of the faith among those who were young in it, and the avaricious rich. But such a heroic work as this is not a precept, but a counsel of charity. Therefore, on the next verse, he says that in such matters he is free.

Ver. 19.— For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all. I humbled myself to all things, even to want and hunger; I accommodated myself to the weaknesses of all, insomuch that, when I saw the Corinthians slow and niggardly in their support of the Apostles, I refused to accept any payment from them, that I might gain all by condescending to their infirmity.

Ver. 20.— To them that are under the law, as under the law. To the Jews I became as one under the Mosaic law. This took place, e.g., says Œcumenius, when he circumcised Timothy, when, after purifying himself, he went to the Temple, because he had a vow (Act 21:26).

Ver. 21.— To them that are without law, as without law. To the Gentiles I became as though I followed nature only as my light and leader, as the Gentiles do. So Œcumenius, Theophylact, and Chrysostom.

Ver. 22.— I am made all things to all men. Not by acting deceitfully or sinfully, but through sympathy and compassion, which made me suit myself to the dispositions of all men, so, as far as honesty and God's law allow, that I might be able to heal the indispositions of all. Cf. S. Augustine ( Epp. 9 and 19): "Not by lying, but by sympathy; not by cunning craftiness, but by large-hearted compassion was Paul made all things to all men."

The Apostle does not sanction what men of the world wish for and do, viz., the accommodating ourselves through right and wrong to all men, feigning to be heretics with heretics, Turks with Turks, pure with the pure, and unclean with those that are unclean. This he condemns (Gal 2:11 et seq. ). The advice of S. Ephrem ( Attende tibi, c. 10) is sound: " Have charity with all and abstain from all ;" and again the apophthegm of S. Bernard, which embraces every virtue: " Live so as to be prudent for yourself, useful to others, pleasing to God." S. Jordan, S. Dominic's successor in the Generalship of the Order, used to say, as his life related: " If I had devoted myself as closely to any branch of learning as I have to that sentence of S. Paul's, 'I am made all things to all men,' I should be mist learned and eminent in it. Throughout the whole of my life I have studied to accommodate myself to every one: to the soldier I was a soldier, to the nobleman as a nobleman, to the plebeian as a plebeian; and thus I always endeavoured to do them good in this way, while on the watch that I did not lose or hurt my soul while benefitting them."

Ver. 23.— And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you. That I may with other preachers receive, in fu time, fruit of the Gospel that I have preached. The Greek denotes a partaker with others. Hence in the second place Chrysostom understands "partaker thereof" to mean a fellow-sharer of the faithful in the Gospel, i.e., of the crowns laid up for the faithful. And Chrysostom rightly points to the wonderful humility of Paul, in putting himself on a level with even ordinary Christians, when he had surpassed not only the faithful, but all the other Apostles in his labours for the Gospel. Cf. 1Co 15:10.

Ver. 24.— Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? For this I preach the Gospel without charge, for this I am made all things to all men; for this I labour, that I may obtain that best prize of all, given to those who run in this race.

As it is in a race, so is it in the Christian course: it is not all that run that receive the prize, but those only that run well and duly reach the appointed goal. I say duly, or according to the laws of the course which Christ the Judge has laid down for those that run, and according to which he has promised the prize to those that tun well. When, therefore, one is mentioned, more are not excluded, for the Apostle does not mean to say, as Chrysostom well remarks, that only one Christian surpasses the rest, and is more zealous of good works, and will receive the prize; for a similitude does not hold good in all points, but only in that one which is expressed. The comparison here is that, as in a race he who runs well receives the prize, so in Christianity he who runs well will receive a crown of glory. And this is evident from what is added, " So run that ye may obtain, " i.e., not one, but each one. Moreover, in a race it is often not only the first, not the second, third, or fourth who also receives a prize.

Still the Apostle says one, not three or four, because he is chiefly looking at that glory and superexcellent reward given, not to all the elect, but to those few heroic souls that follow, not only the precepts, but also the counsels of Christ. For he is looking to the prize which he is expecting for himself, in having been the only Apostle to preach the Gospel without charge, in having surpassed all the other Apostles in the greatness of his labour and his charity, in having become all things to all men. He says in effect: O Christians, do not merely run duly, that ye may obtain, but run most well and most swiftly, that you may carry off the first and most splendid prize of glory. It is a sluggish soul that says, "It is enough for me to be saved and reach heaven." for each one, says Chrysostom, ought to strive to be first in heaven, and receive the first prize there.

Some understand this passage to refer to the mansions or crowns and prizes prepared for each of the elect, and would read it, "Let each so run that he may obtain his prize." But this explanation is more acute than simple.

Anselm again takes it a little differently. Heathens, heretics, reprobates, he says, run, but the one people of elect Christians receives the prize. But the apostle is speaking to Christians only as running, and he urges them to so run that they may obtain the prize to which they are called by the Gospel of Christ.

So run that ye may obtain. I.e., obtain the crown of glory and the prize of victory. The allusion is to those that ran in the public games for a crown as the prize, with which they were crowned when victorious. Cf. notes to Rev. iii. 2. The word so denotes the rectitude, the diligence, the swiftness, and the perseverance especially required on order to win the prize. The course of Christ was marked by these qualities, that course which all ought to put before themselves for imitation. S. Bernard ( Ep. 254) says: " The Creator Himself of man and of the world, did he, while he dwelt here below with men, stand still? Nay, as the Scripture testifies, 'He want about doing good and healing all.' He went through the world not unfruitfully, carelessly, lazily, or with laggers step, but so as it was written of Him, 'He rejoiced as a giant to run his course.' No one catches the runner but he that runs equally fast; and what avails it to stretch out after Christ if you do not lay hold of Him? Therefore is it that Paul said, 'So run that ye may obtain.' There, O Christian, set the goal of your course and your journeying where Christ placed His. 'He was made obedient unto death,' However long then you may have run, you will not obtain the prize if you do not persevere even unto death. The prize is Christ." He then goes on to point out that in the race of virtue not to run, to stand still, is to fail and go back, " But if while He runs you stand still, you come no nearer to Christ, nay, you recede from Him, and should fear for yourself what David said, 'Lo, they that are far from Thee shall perish.' Therefore, if to go forward is to run, when you cease to go forward you cease to run: when you are not running you begin to go back. Hence we may plainly see that not to wish to go forward is nothing but to go back. Jacob saw a ladder, and on the ladder angels, where none was sitting down, none standing still; but all seemed to be either ascending or descending, that w might be plainly given to understand that in this mortal course no mean is to be found between going forward and going back, but that in the same way as our bodies are known to be continuously either increasing or decreasing, so must our spirit be always either going forward or going back."

Ver. 25.— And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in al things. Every wrestler, &c., refrains from everything that may 212 endanger his success. 1. The allusion is t the Isthmian games, celebrated at Corinth in honour of Neptune and Palæmon, in which the victor was crowned with a pine-wreath. Of these games the poet Archias this sings:—

"Four Argive towns the sacred contests see,

 And two to men, and two to gods belong;

 Jove gives the olive, Phœbus sunny fruit,

 Palæmon poppy, and Archemorus the pine."

2. There is consequently an allusion also to the athletes, the wrestlers, and boxers, who fought with their fists; to the runners, who strine for the prize for speed; to all who contested, whether with hand, or foot, or the whole body, for the prize.

3. All these abstained from luxurious living, and only lived of the necessities of life. This is what the Apostle alludes to when he says, is temperate in all things. Clement of Alexandria ( Strom. lib. iii.), following Plato ( de Leg. lib. viii.), adds that they also refrained from all sexual intercourse. For as lust weakens, enervates, and exhausts the body, so do continence and chastity strengthen the body, and much more the mind,  S. Ephrem, too, in his tractate on the words, "It is better to marry than to burn," explains this abstinence from all things spoken of here to be abstinence from all lust.

4. The course is this present life, of each one's state in the Church, and especially that of an evangelist; the runner or wrestler is each Christian. Hence, S. Dioysius ( de Eccles. Hierarch. cvii.) says that those who are baptized are anointed to be Christ's athletes, and are consequently called to fight a holy fight for faith and godliness. He adds that it is the practice, too, to anoint them when dead, as athletes perfected by death. He says: "The first anointing called him to a holy fight; the second shows that he has finished his course and been perfected by death."

5. In this course and contest the antagonist is the world, the flesh, and the devil; the athlete's diet is moderate food tempered with fasting; the fight consists in the castigation of the body, and all the arduous offices of virtue, which are accomplished with a conflict, whether external or internal;—especially is the preaching and spreading of the Gospel such a fight; and from such arises the victory over the world, the flesh, and the devil. The prize is the incorruptible crown of eternal glory for which Paul expresses his longing in 2 Tim. iv. 8. The punishment inflicted on the conquered is rejection and eternal confusion (ver. 27). As the athlete, by abstinence, exercise, and toil, subdues and exercises his body, and prepares it for the race-course or the contest, that he may conquer by lawful and generous effort, and may obtain a corruptible crown, so much more to obtain the eternal crown do we Christians, and especially I, your Apostle, keep under and exercise my body by fasting, labour, and weariness, and so much more severely do I, as an athlete in the Divine contest, exact from myself all the offices of those that fight. I do this, lest my body lose the strength derived from continency and a hard life by luxurious living, and then dwindle down into the helplessness of a self-indulgent life. But as I have to fight against the world, the flesh, and the devil, let me rather imitate the athletes, and so conquer and be crowned. Come, then, O Corinthians, run with me in this course; abstain not only from things offered to idols, because of scandal, but also from luxuries—from wine and lust—that you may gain the victory and carry off the prize. This exhortation to abstinence was occasioned by the question of idol—sacrifices, as I sain at the beginning of chapter viii.

Epaminondas, leader of the Thebans, having fought most bravely in battle, and being wounded, even to death, asked, as he was dying, whether his shield were safe and the enemy slain; and when they answered "Yes" to both questions, he said: "Now is the end of my life; but a better and higher beginning is as hand: now is Epaminondas being born in so dying." So Valerius Maximus relates. If Epaminondas so strove for a temporal victory, for praise and glory that are evanescent, and died so joyfully and gloriously, what shall the soldier of Christ do for the crown that fadeth not 214 away, for the glory that knows no ending? Tertullian ( ad Martyred, c. iv.) says excellently: " If earthly glories can so overcome bodily and mental delights as to throw contempt on the sword, fire, crucifixion, wild beasts, and torments, in order to obtain the reward of human praise, I may well say that these sufferings are but little to undergo to obtain the glories of heaven, Is glass worth as much as true pearls? Who therefore would not most joyfully suffer for the true glory as much as others suffer for the false."

Virgil says of Junius Brutus, who ordered his sons to be put to death for conspiring against the Romans with the Tarquins—

"The love of Rome him mastered with boundless thirst for praise;"

so we may say of the Christian—

"The love of Christ will conquer, and heaven's unquenchable thirst,"

Listen to what S. Chrysostom says ( de Martyr. vol. iii.): " You are but a feather-bed soldier if you think that you can conquer without a fight, triumph without a battle. Exert your strength, fight strenuously, strive to the death in this battle. Look at the covenant, attend to the conditions, know the warfare—the covenant that you have entered into, the conditions on which you have enrolled yourself, the warfare into which you have thrown youself. "

It is clear from this, says S. Chrysostom, that faith alone is not sufficient for salvation, but that works also are requisite, and heroic efforts, and especially no small abstinence from all the allurements of the world. For, as S. Jerome says ( Ep. 34 ad Julian ): " It is difficult, nay, it is impossible for any one to enjoy both the present and the future, to fill here his belly and there his soul, to pass from one delight to the other, to show himself glorious both in heaven and in earth. "

S. Augustine piously consoles and animates Christ's athletes by reminding them of the help that God gives ( Serm, 105). He says: " he who ordered the strife helps them that strive. God does not look upon you in your contest as the spectators do on the athlete: for the populace warms him by shouts, but cannot lend him any help. He who arranged the contest can provide the crown, but cannot lend strength; buy God, when He sees His servants striving, helps them when they call upon Him. For it is the voice of the combatant himself in Psalm xciv. 18, who says, 'When I said, my foot slippeth, Thy mercy, O Lord, held me up.'" S. Dionysius too ( de Eccl. Hier. cii.) says: " To them that strive the Lord promises crowns as God. He has laid down the rules of the contest by His wisdom. He has appointed rewards most fair and beautiful for the conquerors; and, what is surely more Divine, He Himself, as supreme living-kindness and goodness, conquers in His warriors; and while He indwells within them, He fights for their safety and victory against the forces of death and corruption. "

Ver. 26.— So fight I, not as one that beateth the air. The comparison is still maintained. I fight as an athlete, but I do not spend my toil for nought, but I wound my enemy, i.e., I subdue my body and my flesh; and when I have subdued this foe, the remaining two, the world and the devil, are easily overcome. For the world and the devil cannot kill us, wound us, strike us, tempt us, approach us, except through the body and its organs, the eyes and ears and tongue and other members.

Ver. 27.— But I keep under my body and bring it into subjection. I keep under means, says S. Ambrose, "I repress it by fastings;" "I wound it with stripes," says S. Basil ( de Virginitate ); "I starve it," says Origen. S. Augustine ( de Utilit. Jejun.) says: " The devil often takes it upon him to protect the flesh against the soul, and to say, 'Why do you thus fast?—you are laying up punishment in store for yourself, you are your own torturer and murderer.' Answer him, 'I keep it under, lest this beast of burden throw me headlong.'" For our flesh is the devil's instrument; it is, says S. Bernard, "the snare of the devil" ( Serm. 8 in Ps. xci.). Erasmus, following Theophylact and Paulinus ( Ep. 58 ad. Aug.), renders the Greek verb, "I make it black and blue," or "I make the eyes of a black and bloody colour." This last is, as Hesychius and Suidas say, the literal rendering of the word. But all others in general take the word to mean subdue, coerce, bruise. Castigate in the Latin, or "keep under," as the text, suits both renderings, but the second is better, as being at once plainer and more near to the Greek—taking ύπωπιάξω to be synonymous the ύποπιέξω.

This keeping under or castigation of the body is effected by fastings, hair-shirts, humiliations, scourgings, and other mortifications of the flesh. Hence some think that Paul was in the habit of scourging his body. This is certainly the literal meaning of the Greek, which is rendered by Beza, Melancthon, Castalion, and Henry Stephen "bruise." but a bruise is not caused except by a blow, whether from a stick, or a scourge, or some other instrument. Moreover, fasting (which some, as, e.g., Ambrose, Gregory, and Chrysostom, think was Paul's discipline) is not so much a strife and contest as a preparation for them; for of it he has already said, "Every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things." Cf. also Jacob Gretser ( de Discipl. lib. i. c. 4).

Moreover, as Anselm remarks, as well as Gregory, in a passage to be quoted directly, the Apostle, while he keeps under and scourges his body, at the same time scourges and wounds the devil, his antagonist, who is in alliance with our carnal concupiscence, and lies in hiding within the foul jungle of the flesh, and through it tempts and attacks us.

Lest I myself should be a castaway. Lest I be a reprobate from God and excluded from heaven, Maldonatus ( Notæ Manusc.) learnedly says that, as the comparison is still with the arena, a castaway here is one who is conquered in the fight; and that S. Paul's meaning is, "Lest while I teach others to conquer I myself be conquered." The Apostle is speaking not of eternal reprobation, which is in the mind of God, but of that temporal reprobation which is the execution of the eternal. He is referring to Jer. vi. 30: "Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them."

1. Hence it is clear that the Apostle is not speaking (as in 2Co 13:7), as some think, of the reprobation of men, as if his meaning were, "What I preach that I practise: I do not fare sumptuously, but I keep under my body, lest I be a cast away and reprobate of men, and regarded as one not doing what he teaches." For Jeremiah clearly speaks of God's rejection, not men's; and reprobation and reprobate always refer to this when they are spoken of absolutely, and not restricted to men, as they are restricted in 2Co 13:7. Hence appears the uncertainty to us of grace and predestination. Paul feared being condemned, and will you believe that your faith cannot but save you?

2. It also follows that Paul had no revelation of his salvation. Cf. S. Gregory (lib. vi. Ep. 22, ad Gregoriam ).

3. And that he was not so strong in grace not that he might fall from it.

From this passage, it is evident that the Christian's fight consists especially in bringing the body into subjection. For this foe is an inward foe, and one most hard to withstand, and therefore the snares of the flesh are to be dreaded more than all others. We ought also to get ourselves ready for this fight by the athlete's training, that is, by temperance, and in this temperance we should begin the fight, and in it daily increase, grow strong, and cone to perfection. The Christian, therefore, must begin with conquering gluttony. When that is done, it will be easier for him to conquer other vices, as Cassianus and others say. Hence it appears that the Christian fighter must keep under his body, lest its lusts make him a castaway; and that, therefore, bodily mortification, by watchings, fastings, and other afflictions, is the right way to salvation, and is the most suitable instrument for perfecting virtue, and for the complete subdual of vices, if it be done with discretion, and in proportion to one's strength and health. Cf. S. Thomas (ii. ii. qu. 188, art. 7).

But let us hear what the ancient doctors of the Church have to say on this head. Ambrose ( Ep. ad Eccl. Vercell.) says: " I hear that there are men who say that there is no merit in fasting, and who scoff at those who mortify their flesh, that they nay subdue it to the mind. This S. Paul would never have done or said if he had thought it folly " (let our Protestant friends observe this); " for he says, as though boasting, 'I keep under my body and bring it into subjection, lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.' Therefore, those who do not mortify their body, and who wish to preach to others, are themselves regarded as reprobates, What new school has sent forth these Epicureans to preach pleasure and advise luxury? The Lord Jesus, wishing to strengthen us against the temptations of the devil, fasted before He strove with him, that we might know that we cannot in any other way overcome the blandishments of the evil one. Let these men say why Christ fasted if it were not to give us an example to do likewise, "

S. Gregory ( Morals, lib. xxx. c. 26) says: " Nebuzaradan, the chief of the cooks, destroyed the walls of Jerusalem as he destroys the virtues of the soul when the belly is not kept in check. Hence it is that Paul took away his power from the chief of the cooks, i.e., the belly, in its assault on the walls of Jerusalem, when he said, 'I keep under my body and bring it into subjection.' Hence it is that he had said just before, 'So fight I, not as one that beateth the air.' When we retrain the flesh, it is not the air but the unclean spirits that we wound with the blows of our abstinence; and in subduing what is within we deal blows to the foes without, Hence is it that, when the King of Babylon orders the furnace to be heated, he has a heap of tow and pitch thrown into it, but nevertheless the fire has no power over the children of abstinence; for though our old enemy put before our eyes a countless number of delicacies t increase the fire of our lust, yet the grace of the Spirit from on high whispers to us, bidding us stand our ground, untouched by the burning lusts of the flesh."

S. Basil ( Hom. de Legend. Gentil. Libris ) says: " The body must be mortified and kept in check like a wild beast, and the passions that take their rise from it to the soul's hurt must be kept in order by the scourge reason, lest by giving free rein to pleasure the mind become like a drover of restive and unbroken horses, and be run away with and list. Amongst other sayings there is one of Pythagoras which deserves to be remembered. When he saw a certain man looking after himself with great care, and fattening himself by sumptuous living and exercise, he said: 'Unhappy man! you are ever engaged in building for yourself a worse and worse prison!' It is said too of Plato, that owing to his vivid realisation of the harm that arises from the body, he fixed his Academy at Athens in an unhealthy spot, that he might reduce the excessive prosperity of the body, as a gardener prunes a vine whose boughs stretch too far. I too have often heard physicians say that extremely good health is fallacious. Since, therefore, care for the body seems to be harmful to body and soul alike, to hug this burden and to be a slave to it is evident proof of madness. But if we study to despise it, we shall not easily lose ourselves in admiration of anything human. " S. Basil again ( in Reg. Fusius Disp. Reg. 17) says: " As a muscular build and good complexion put a stamp of superiority on the athlete, so is the Christian distinguished from others by bodily emaciation and pallid complexion, which are ever the companions of abstinence. He is thereby proved to be a wrestler indeed, following the commands of Christ, and in weakness of body he lays his adversary low on the ground, and shows how powerful he is in the contests of godliness according to the words, 'When I am weak, than am I strong! '"

S. Chrysostom says here: " 'I mortify my body' means that I undergo much labour to live temperately. Although desire is intractable, the belly clamorous, yet I rein them in, and do not surrender myself to my passion, but repress them, and with wearisome effort bring under nature herself. I say this that no one may lose heart in his struggle for virtue, for it is an arduous fight. Wherefore he says, 'I keep under my body and bring it into subjection.' He did not say, 'I destroy and punish it,' for the flesh is not an enemy, but 'I keep it under and bring it into subjection,' because it is the property of my Lord, not of an enemy; of a trainer, not a foe; 'lest by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway,' If Paul feared this, being such a teacher as he was; if he has any dread, after having preached to the whole world, what are we to say? "

S. Jerome, writing against Jovinian, a heretic, an opponent of fasting, of chastity, and asceticism, ably defends these duties, and about the end of lib. ii. he says: " The fact that many agree with your opinions is a mark of luxuriousness; and you think it adds to your reputation for wisdom to have more pigs running after you to be fed with the food or the flames of hell. Basilides, a teacher of luxury and filthy practices, has after these many years now been transformed into Jovinian, as into Euphorbus, that the Latin race might know his heresy, It was the banner of the Cross and the severity of preaching " (let the Protestants mark this) " which destroyed the idol-temples. Impurity, gluttony, and drunkenness are endeavouring to overthrow the fortitude taught by the Cross. False prophets always promise pleasant things, but they give not much satisfaction. Truth is bitter, and those who preach it are filled with bitterness."

Cassianus ( de Instit. Renunt. lib. v. c. xvii. et seq. ) says: " Do you want to listen to the true athlete of Christ striving according to the lawful rules of the contest? He says, 'I therefore so run not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air, but I keep under my body and bring it into subjection, lest when I have preached to others I myself should be a castaway.' Seest thou how he has placed in himself, that is in his flesh, the hottest part of the battle, and has thus put it on a firm base, and how he has made the fight consist in simple bodily mortification and in the subjection of his flesh? " And then a little afterwards he repeats these words of the Apostle, and adds: " This properly has to do with the sufferings of continence, and bodily fasting, and mortification of the flesh. He describes himself as a strenuous combatant of the flesh, and points out that the blows of abstinence that he directs against it are not in vain, but that he has gained a triumph by mortifying his body. That body, having been punished by the blows of continence and wounded by the bruises of fastings, has given to the victorious spirit the crown of immortality and the palm that never fadeth. . . . So fights he by fastings and affliction of the flesh, not as one that beateth the air, i.e., that deals in vain the blows of continence; but he wounds the spirits who dwell in the air, by mortifying his body. For he that says, 'not as one that beateth the air,' declares that he strikes some one that is in the air. "

Further, not only for the sake of lust, but to subdue pride and break down all vices, and to cultivate every virtue, the body must be mortified, as S. Jerome says ( Ep. 14 ad Celantiam ): " They who are taught by experience and knowledge to hold fast the virtue of abstinence mortify their flesh to break the soul's pride, in order that so they may descent from the pinnacle of their haughty arrogance to fulfil the will of God, which is most perfectly fulfilled in humility. Therefore so they withdraw their mind from hankering after variety of foods, that they may devote all their strength to the pursuit of virtue, By degrees the flesh feels less and less the burden of fastings, as the soul more hungers after righteousness. For that chosen vessel, Paul, in mortifying his body and bringing it into subjection, was not seeking after chastity alone, as some ignorant persons suppose: for fasting helps not only this virtue but every virtue."

Lastly, the holy hermits of old, in their zeal after perfection, mortified their bodies to a degree that seems incredible. And that this was pleasing to God is seen from the holiness, the happiness, and the length of their lives. We may read for this Jerome, in his life of S. Hilarion, S. Paul, S. Malchus; Athanasius in his life of S. Antony; Theodoret in his life of S. Simeon Stylites, who for eighty years stood under the open sky night and day, hardly taking food or sleep. sagacious men have observed in their lives of the Saints that scarcely any Saints have been illustrious for their miracles and for their actions but such as were eminent for their fastings and asceticism, or who afflicted their bodies, or were afflicted by God with diseases, or by enemies and tyrants with tortures and troubles; that other Saints, who led an ordinary life, were of great benefit to the Church, but seldom if ever performed any miracles.

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

First Corinthians

From Ephesus a.d. 54 Or 55

By Way of Introduction

It would be a hard-boiled critic today who would dare deny the genuineness of I Corinthians. The Dutch wild man, Van Manen, did indeed argue that Paul wrote no epistles if indeed he ever lived. Such intellectual banality is well answered by Whateley’s Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte which was so cleverly done that some readers were actually convinced that no such man ever existed, but is the product of myth and legend. Even Baur was compelled to acknowledge the genuineness of I and II Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.

We know where Paul was when he wrote the letter for he tells us in 1Co_16:8 : " But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost." That was, indeed, his plan, but the uproar in Ephesus at the hands of Demetrius caused his departure sooner than he expected (Acts 18:21-20:1; 2Co_2:12.). But he is in Ephesus when he writes.

We know also the time of the year when he writes, in the spring before pentecost. Unfortunately we do not know the precise year, though it was at the close of his stay of three years (in round numbers) at Ephesus (Act_20:31). Like all the years in Paul’s ministry we have to allow a sliding scale in relation to his other engagements. One may guess the early spring of a.d. 54 or 55.

The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:28-19:1). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul’s request to go back to Corinth (1Co_16:12). Some of the household of Chloe had heard or come from Corinth with full details of the factions in the church over Apollos and Paul, clearly the reason why Apollos left (1Co_1:10-12). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Co_4:17), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Co_16:10.). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Co_5:9). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Co_7:1). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Co_8:1). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Co_12:1). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Co_15:12). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Co_16:1) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Co_16:5.). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Co_13:1), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Co_1:15-22). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Co_16:17), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Act_19:22). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul’s hurried departure from Ephesus (Act_20:1) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul’s impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Co_2:12.).

It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts 18), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Co_3:10) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts 15:1-35; Gal_2:1-10). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Gal_2:11-21). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul’s converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2 Corinthians 10-13) as Jesus did the Pharisees in Matthew 23 on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul’s many-sidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter 1Co_13:1-13) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter 1 Corinthians 15). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul’s dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Co_11:28).

JFB: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

The AUTHENTICITY of this Epistle is attested by CLEMENT OF ROME [First Epistle to the Corinthians, 47], POLYCARP [Epistle to the Philippians, 11], and IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 4.27.3]. The city to which it was sent was famed for its wealth and commerce, which were chiefly due to its situation between the Ionian and Ægean Seas on the isthmus connecting the Peloponese with Greece. In Paul's time it was the capital of the province Achaia and the seat of the Roman proconsul (Act 18:12). The state of morals in it was notorious for debauchery, even in the profligate heathen world; so much so that "to Corinthianize" was a proverbial phrase for "to play the wanton"; hence arose dangers to the purity of the Christian Church at Corinth. That Church was founded by Paul on his first visit (Acts 18:1-17).

He had been the instrument of converting many Gentiles (1Co 12:2), and some Jews (Act 18:8), notwithstanding the vehement opposition of the countrymen of the latter (Act 18:5), during the year and a half in which he sojourned there. The converts were chiefly of the humbler classes (1Co 1:26, &c.). Crispus (1Co 1:14; Act 18:8), Erastus, and Gaius (Caius) were, however, men of rank (Rom 16:23). A variety of classes is also implied in 1Co 11:22. The risk of contamination by contact with the surrounding corruptions, and the temptation to a craving for Greek philosophy and rhetoric (which Apollos' eloquent style rather tended to foster, Act 18:24, &c.) in contrast to Paul's simple preaching of Christ crucified (1Co 2:1, &c.), as well as the opposition of certain teachers to him, naturally caused him anxiety. Emissaries from the Judaizers of Palestine boasted of "letters of commendation" from Jerusalem, the metropolis of the faith. They did not, it is true, insist on circumcision in refined Corinth, where the attempt would have been hopeless, as they did among the simpler people of Galatia; but they attacked the apostolic authority of Paul (1Co 9:1-2; 2Co 10:1, 2Co 10:7-8), some of them declaring themselves followers of Cephas, the chief apostle, others boasting that they belonged to Christ Himself (1Co 1:12; 2Co 10:7), while they haughtily repudiated all subordinate teaching. Those persons gave out themselves for apostles (2Co 11:5, 2Co 11:13). The ground taken by them was that Paul was not one of the Twelve, and not an eye-witness of the Gospel facts, and durst not prove his apostleship by claiming sustenance from the Christian Church. Another section avowed themselves followers of Paul himself, but did so in a party spirit, exalting the minister rather than Christ. The followers of Apollos, again, unduly prized his Alexandrian learning and eloquence, to the disparagement of the apostle, who studiously avoided any deviation from Christian simplicity (1Co 2:1-5). In some of this last philosophizing party there may have arisen the Antinomian tendency which tried to defend theoretically their own practical immorality: hence their denial of the future resurrection, and their adoption of the Epicurean motto, prevalent in heathen Corinth, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die" (1Co 15:32). Hence, perhaps, arose their connivance at the incestuous intercourse kept up by one of the so-called Christian body with his stepmother during his father's life. The household of Chloe informed Paul of many other evils: such as contentions, divisions, and lawsuits brought against brethren in heathen law courts by professing Christians; the abuse of their spiritual gifts into occasions of display and fanaticism; the interruption of public worship by simultaneous and disorderly ministrations, and decorum violated by women speaking unveiled (contrary to Oriental usage), and so usurping the office of men, and even the holy communion desecrated by greediness and revelling on the part of the communicants. Other messengers, also, came from Corinth, consulting him on the subject of (1) the controversy about meats offered to idols; (2) the disputes about celibacy and marriage; (3) the due exercise of spiritual gifts in public worship; (4) the best mode of making the collection which he had requested for the saints at Jerusalem (1Co 16:1, &c.). Such were the circumstances which called forth the First Epistle to the Corinthians, the most varied in its topics of all the Epistles.

In 1Co 5:9, "I wrote unto you in an Epistle not to company with fornicators," it is implied that Paul had written a previous letter to the Corinthians (now lost). Probably in it he had also enjoined them to make a contribution for the poor saints at Jerusalem, whereupon they seem to have asked directions as to the mode of doing so, to which he now replies (1Co 16:2). It also probably announced his intention of visiting them on way to Macedonia, and again on his return from Macedonia (2Co 1:15-16), which purpose he changed hearing the unfavorable report from Chloe's household (1Co 16:5-7), for which he was charged with (2Co 1:17). In the first Epistle which we have, the subject of fornication is alluded to only in a way, as if he were rather replying to an excuse set up after rebuke in the matter, than introducing for the first time [ALFORD]. Preceding this former letter, he seems to have paid a second visit to Corinth. For in 2Co 12:4; 2Co 13:1, he speaks of his intention of paying them a third visit, implying he had already twice visited them. See on 2Co 2:1; 2Co 13:2; also see on 2Co 1:15; 2Co 1:16. It is hardly likely that during his three years' sojourn at Ephesus he would have failed to revisit his Corinthian converts, which he could so readily do by sea, there being constant maritime intercourse between the two cities. This second visit was probably a short one (compare 1Co 16:7); and attended with pain and humiliation (2Co 2:1; 2Co 12:21), occasioned by the scandalous conduct of so many of his own converts. His milder censures having then failed to produce reformation, he wrote briefly directing them "not to company with fornicators." On their misapprehending this injunction, he explained it more fully in the Epistle, the first of the two extant (1Co 5:9, 1Co 5:12). That the second visit is not mentioned in Acts is no objection to its having really taken place, as that book is fragmentary and omits other leading incidents in Paul's life; for example, his visit to Arabia, Syria, and Cilicia (Gal 1:17-21).

The PLACE OF WRITING is fixed to be Ephesus (1Co 16:8). The subscription in English Version, "From Philippi," has no authority whatever, and probably arose from a mistaken translation of 1Co 16:5, "For I am passing through Macedonia." At the time of writing Paul implies (1Co 16:8) that he intended to leave Ephesus after Pentecost of that year. He really did leave it about Pentecost (A.D. 57). Compare Act 19:20. The allusion to Passover imagery in connection with our Christian Passover, Easter (1Co 5:7), makes it likely that the season was about Easter. Thus the date of the Epistle is fixed with tolerable accuracy, about Easter, certainly before Pentecost, in the third year of his residence at Ephesus, A.D. 57. For other arguments, see CONYBEARE and HOWSON'S Life and Epistles of St. Paul.

The Epistle is written in the name of Sosthenes "[our] brother." BIRKS supposes he is the same as the Sosthenes, Act 18:17, who, he thinks, was converted subsequently to that occurrence. He bears no part in the Epistle itself, the apostle in the very next verses (1Co 1:4, &c.) using the first person: so Timothy is introduced, 2Co 1:1. The bearers of the Epistle were probably Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (see the subscription, 1Co 16:24), whom he mentions (1Co 16:17-18) as with him then, but who he implies are about to return back to Corinth; and therefore he commends them to the regard of the Corinthians.

JFB: 1 Corinthians (Outline)

• THE INSCRIPTION; THANKSGIVING FOR THE SPIRITUAL STATE OF THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH; REPROOF OF PARTY DIVISIONS: HIS OWN METHOD OF PREACHING ONLY CHRIST. (1Co. 1:1-31)
• PAUL'S SUBJECT OF PREACHING, CHRIST CRUCIFIED, NOT IN WORLDLY, BUT IN HEAVENLY, WISDOM AMONG THE PERFECT. (1Co. 2:1-16)
• PAUL COULD NOT SPEAK TO THEM OF DEEP SPIRITUAL TRUTHS, AS THEY WERE CARNAL, CONTENDING FOR THEIR SEVERAL TEACHERS; THESE ARE NOTHING BUT WORKERS FOR GOD, TO WHOM THEY MUST GIVE ACCOUNT IN THE DAY OF FIERY JUDGMENT. THE HEARERS ARE GOD'S TEMPLE, WHICH THEY MUST NOT DEFILE BY CONTENTIONS FOR TEACHERS, WHO, AS WELL AS ALL THINGS, ARE THEIRS, BEING CHRIST'S. (1Co. 3:1-23)
• TRUE VIEW OF MINISTERS: THE JUDGMENT IS NOT TO BE FORESTALLED; MEANWHILE THE APOSTLES' LOW STATE CONTRASTS WITH THE CORINTHIANS' PARTY PRIDE, NOT THAT PAUL WOULD SHAME THEM, BUT AS A FATHER WARN THEM; FOR WHICH END HE SENT TIMOTHY, AND WILL SOON COME HIMSELF. (1Co. 4:1-21)
• THE INCESTUOUS PERSON AT CORINTH: THE CORINTHIANS REPROVED FOR CONNIVANCE, AND WARNED TO PURGE OUT THE BAD LEAVEN. QUALIFICATION OF HIS FORMER COMMAND AS TO ASSOCIATION WITH SINNERS OF THE WORLD. (1Co 5:1-13)
• LITIGATION OF CHRISTIANS IN HEATHEN COURTS CENSURED: ITS VERY EXISTENCE BETRAYS A WRONG SPIRIT: BETTER TO BEAR WRONG NOW, AND HEREAFTER THE DOERS OF WRONG SHALL BE SHUT OUT OF HEAVEN. (1Co 6:1-11)
• REFUTATION OF THE ANTINOMIAN DEFENSE OF FORNICATION AS IF IT WAS LAWFUL BECAUSE MEATS ARE SO. (1Co 6:12-20)
• REPLY TO THEIR INQUIRIES AS TO MARRIAGE; THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE IN OTHER THINGS IS, ABIDE IN YOUR STATION, FOR THE TIME IS SHORT. (1Co. 7:1-40) The Corinthians in their letter had probably asked questions which tended to disparage marriage, and had implied that it was better to break it off when contracted with an unbeliever.
• ON PARTAKING OF MEATS OFFERED TO IDOLS. (1Co 8:1-13) Though to those knowing that an idol has no existence, the question of eating meats offered to idols (referred to in the letter of the Corinthians, compare 1Co 7:1) might seem unimportant, it is not so with some, and the infirmities of such should be respected. The portions of the victims not offered on the altars belonged partly to the priests, partly to the offerers; and were eaten at feasts in the temples and in private houses and were often sold in the markets; so that Christians were constantly exposed to the temptation of receiving them, which was forbidden (Num 25:2; Psa 106:28). The apostles forbade it in their decree issued from Jerusalem (Acts 15:1-29; Act 21:25); but Paul does not allude here to that decree, as he rests his precepts rather on his own independent apostolic authority.
• HE CONFIRMS HIS TEACHING AS TO NOT PUTTING A STUMBLING-BLOCK IN A BROTHER'S WAY (1Co 8:13) BY HIS OWN EXAMPLE IN NOT USING HIS UNDOUBTED RIGHTS AS AN APOSTLE, SO AS TO WIN MEN TO CHRIST. (1Co. 9:1-27)
• DANGER OF FELLOWSHIP WITH IDOLATRY ILLUSTRATED IN THE HISTORY OF ISRAEL: SUCH FELLOWSHIP INCOMPATIBLE WITH FELLOWSHIP IN THE LORD'S SUPPER. EVEN LAWFUL THINGS ARE TO BE FORBORNE, SO AS NOT TO HURT WEAK BRETHREN. (1Co. 10:1-33)
• CENSURE ON DISORDERS IN THEIR ASSEMBLIES: THEIR WOMEN NOT BEING VEILED, AND ABUSES AT THE LOVE-FEASTS. (1Co. 11:1-34) Rather belonging to the end of the tenth chapter, than to this chapter.
• THE USE AND THE ABUSE OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS, ESPECIALLY PROPHESYING AND TONGUES. (1Co. 12:1-31)
• CHARITY OR LOVE SUPERIOR TO ALL GIFTS. (1Co 13:1-13)
• SUPERIORITY OF PROPHECY OVER TONGUES. (1Co. 14:1-25)
• RULES FOR THE EXERCISE OF GIFTS IN THE CONGREGATION. (1Co 14:26-40)
• THE RESURRECTION PROVED AGAINST THE DENIERS OF IT AT CORINTH. (1Co. 15:1-58)
• DIRECTIONS AS TO THE COLLECTION FOR THE JUDEAN CHRISTIANS: PAUL'S FUTURE PLANS: HE COMMENDS TO THEM TIMOTHY, APOLLOS, &C. SALUTATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS. (1Co. 16:1-24)

TSK: 1 Corinthians 9 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

1Co 9:1, He shows his liberty; 1Co 9:7, and that the minister ought to live by the Gospel; 1Co 9:15, yet that himself has of his own accord abstained, 1Co 9:18. to be either chargeable unto them, 1Co 9:22. or offensive unto any, in matters indifferent; 1Co 9:24, Our life is like unto a race.

Poole: 1 Corinthians 9 (Chapter Introduction)

CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 9

MHCC: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

The Corinthian church contained some Jews, but more Gentiles, and the apostle had to contend with the superstition of the one, and the sinful conduct of the other. The peace of this church was disturbed by false teachers, who undermined the influence of the apostle. Two parties were the result; one contending earnestly for the Jewish ceremonies, the other indulging in excesses contrary to the gospel, to which they were especially led by the luxury and the sins which prevailed around them. This epistle was written to rebuke some disorderly conduct, of which the apostle had been apprized, and to give advice as to some points whereon his judgment was requested by the Corinthians. Thus the scope was twofold. 1. To apply suitable remedies to the disorders and abuses which prevailed among them. 2. To give satisfactory answers on all the points upon which his advice had been desired. The address, and Christian mildness, yet firmness, with which the apostle writes, and goes on from general truths directly to oppose the errors and evil conduct of the Corinthians, is very remarkable. He states the truth and the will of God, as to various matters, with great force of argument and animation of style.

MHCC: 1 Corinthians 9 (Chapter Introduction)

(1Co 9:1-14) The apostle shows his authority, and asserts his right to be maintained.

(1Co 9:15-23) He waved this part of his Christian liberty, for the good of others.

(1Co 9:24-27) He did all this, with care and diligence, in view of an unfading crown.

Matthew Henry: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians

Corinth was a principal city of Greece, in that particular division of it which was called Achaia. It was situated on the isthmus (or neck of land) that joined Peloponnesus to the rest of Greece, on the southern side, and had two ports adjoining, one at the bottom of the Corinthian Gulf, called Lechaeum, not far from the city, whence they traded to Italy and the west, the other at the bottom of the Sinus Saronicus, called Cenchrea, at a more remote distance, whence they traded to Asia. From this situation, it is no wonder that Corinth should be a place of great trade and wealth; and, as affluence is apt to produce luxury of all kinds, neither is it to be wondered at if a place so famous for wealth and arts should be infamous for vice. It was in a particular manner noted for fornication, insomuch that a Corinthian woman was a proverbial phrase for a strumpet, and korinthiazein , korinthiasesthai - to play the Corinthian, is to play the whore, or indulge whorish inclinations. Yet in this lewd city did Paul, by the blessing of God on his labours, plant and raise a Christian church, chiefly among the Gentiles, as seems very probable from the history of this matter, Acts 18:1-18, compared with some passages in this epistle, particularly 1Co 12:2, where the apostle tells them, You know that you wee Gentiles, carried away to those dumb idols even as you were led, though it is not improbable that many Jewish converts might be also among them, for we are told that Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord, with all his house, Act 18:8. He continued in this city nearly two years, as is plain from Act 18:11 and Act 18:18 compared, and laboured with great success, being encouraged by a divine vision assuring him God had much people in that city, Act 18:9, Act 18:10. Nor did he use to stay long in a place where his ministry met not with acceptance and success.

Some time after he left them he wrote this epistle to them, to water what he had planted and rectify some gross disorders which during his absence had been introduced, partly from the interest some false teacher or teachers had obtained amongst them, and partly from the leaven of their old maxims and manners, that had not been thoroughly purged out by the Christian principles they had entertained. And it is but too visible how much their wealth had helped to corrupt their manners, from the several faults for which the apostle reprehends them. Pride, avarice, luxury, lust (the natural offspring of a carnal and corrupt mind), are all fed and prompted by outward affluence. And with all these either the body of this people or some particular persons among them are here charged by the apostle. Their pride discovered itself in their parties and factions, and the notorious disorders they committed in the exercise of their spiritual gifts. And this vice was not wholly fed by their wealth, but by the insight they had into the Greek learning and philosophy. Some of the ancients tell us that the city abounded with rhetoricians and philosophers. And these were men naturally vain, full of self-conceit, and apt to despise the plain doctrine of the gospel, because it did not feed the curiosity of an inquisitive and disputing temper, nor please the ear with artful speeches and a flow of fine words. Their avarice was manifest in their law-suits and litigations about meum - mine, and tuum - thine, before heathen judges. Their luxury appeared in more instances than one, in their dress, in their debauching themselves even at the Lord's table, when the rich, who were most faulty on this account, were guilty also of a very proud and criminal contempt of their poor brethren. Their lust broke out in a most flagrant and infamous instance, such as had not been named among the Gentiles, not spoken of without detestation - that a man should have his father's wife, either as his wife, or so as to commit fornication with her. This indeed seems to be the fault of a particular person; but the whole church were to blame that they had his crime in no greater abhorrence, that they could endure one of such very corrupt morals and of so flagitious a behaviour among them. But their participation in his sin was yet greater, if, as some of the ancients tell us, they were puffed up on behalf of the great learning and eloquence of this incestuous person. And it is plain from other passages of the epistle that they were not so entirely free from their former lewd inclinations as not to need very strict cautions and strong arguments against fornication: see 1Co 6:9-20. The pride of their learning had also carried many of them so far as to disbelieve or dispute against the doctrine of the resurrection. It is not improbable that they treated this question problematically, as they did many questions in philosophy, and tried their skill by arguing it pro and con.

It is manifest from this state of things that there was much that deserved reprehension, and needed correction, in this church. And the apostle, under the direction and influence of the Holy Spirit, sets himself to do both with all wisdom and faithfulness, and with a due mixture of tenderness and authority, as became one in so elevated and important a station in the church. After a short introduction at the beginning of the epistle, he first blames them for their discord and factions, enters into the origin and source of them, shows them how much pride and vanity, and the affectation of science, and learning, and eloquence, flattered by false teachers, contributed to the scandalous schism; and prescribes humility, and submission to divine instruction, the teaching of God by his Spirit, both by external revelation and internal illumination, as a remedy for the evils that abounded amongst them. He shows them the vanity of their pretended science and eloquence on many accounts. This he does through the first four chapters. In the fifth he treats of the case of the incestuous person, and orders him to be put out from among them. Nor is what the ancients say improbable, that this incestuous person was a man in great esteem, and head of one party at least among them. The apostle seems to tax them with being puffed up on his account, 1Co 5:2. In the sixth chapter he blames them for their law-suits, carried on before heathen judges, when their disputes about property should have been amicably determined amongst themselves, and in the close of the chapter warns them against the sin of fornication, and urges his caution with a variety of arguments. In the seventh chapter he gives advice upon a case of conscience, which some of that church had proposed to him in an epistle, about marriage, and shows it to be appointed of God as a remedy against fornication, that the ties of it were not dissolved, though a husband or wife continued a heathen, when the other became a Christian; and, in short, that Christianity made no change in men's civil states and relations. He gives also some directions here about virgins, in answer, as is probable, to the Corinthians' enquiries. In the eighth he directs them about meats offered to idols, and cautions them against abusing their Christian liberty. From this he also takes occasion, in the ninth chapter, to expatiate a little on his own conduct upon this head of liberty. For, though he might have insisted on a maintenance from the churches where he ministered, he waived this demand, that he might make the gospel of Christ without charge, and did in other things comply with and suit himself to the tempers and circumstances of those among whom he laboured, for their good. In the tenth chapter he dissuades them, from the example of the Jews, against having communion with idolaters, by eating of their sacrifices, inasmuch as they could not be at once partakers of the Lord's table and the table of devils, though they were not bound to enquire concerning meat sold in the shambles, or set before them at a feast made by unbelievers, whether it were a part of the idol-sacrifices or no, but were at liberty to eat without asking questions. In the eleventh chapter he gives direction about their habit in public worship, blames them for their gross irregularities and scandalous disorders in receiving the Lord's supper, and solemnly warns them against the abuse of so sacred an institution. In the twelfth chapter he enters on the consideration of spiritual gifts, which were poured forth in great abundance on this church, upon which they were not a little elated. He tells them, in this chapter, that all came from the same original, and were all directed to the same end. They issued from one Spirit, and were intended for the good of the church, and must be abused when they were not made to minister to this purpose. Towards the close he informs them that they were indeed valuable gifts, but he could recommend to them something far more excellent, upon which he breaks out, in the thirteenth chapter, into the commendation and characteristics of charity. And them, in the fourteenth, he directs them how to keep up decency and order in the churches in the use of their spiritual gifts, in which they seem to have been exceedingly irregular, through pride of their gifts and a vanity of showing them. The fifteenth chapter is taken up in confirming and explaining the great doctrine of the resurrection. The last chapter consists of some particular advices and salutations; and thus the epistle closes.

Matthew Henry: 1 Corinthians 9 (Chapter Introduction)

In this chapter the apostle seems to answer some cavils against himself. I. He asserts his apostolical mission and authority, and gives in his success among them as a testimony to it (1Co 9:1, 1Co 9:2). II. He claims a right to subsist by his ministry, and defends it by several arguments from natural reason and the Mosaical law, and asserts it also to be a constitution of Christ (1Co 9:3-14). III. He shows that he had willingly waived this privilege and power for their benefit (1Co 9:15-18). IV. He specifies several other things, in which he had denied himself for the sake of other men's spiritual interest and salvation (1Co 9:19-23). And, V. Concludes his argument by showing what animated him to this course, even the prospect of an incorruptible crown (1Co 9:24 to the end.)

Barclay: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

A GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS OF PAUL

The Letters Of Paul

There is no more interesting body of documents in the New Testament than the letters of Paul. That is because of all forms of literature a letter is most personal. Demetrius, one of the old Greek literary critics, once wrote, "Every one reveals his own soul in his letters. In every other form of composition it is possible to discern the writercharacter, but in none so clearly as the epistolary." (Demetrius, On Style, 227). It is just because he left us so many letters that we feel we know Paul so well. In them he opened his mind and heart to the folk he loved so much; and in them, to this day, we can see that great mind grappling with the problems of the early church, and feel that great heart throbbing with love for men, even when they were misguided and mistaken.

The Difficulty Of Letters

At the same time, there is often nothing so difficult to understand as a letter. Demetrius (On Style, 223) quotes a saying of Artemon, who edited the letters of Aristotle. Artemon said that a letter ought to be written in the same manner as a dialogue, because it was one of the two sides of a dialogue. In other words, to read a letter is like listening to one side of a telephone conversation. So when we read the letters of Paul we are often in a difficulty. We do not possess the letter which he was answering; we do not fully know the circumstances with which he was dealing; it is only from the letter itself that we can deduce the situation which prompted it. Before we can hope to understand fully any letter Paul wrote, we must try to reconstruct the situation which produced it.

The Ancient Letters

It is a great pity that Paulletters were ever called epistles. They are in the most literal sense letters. One of the great lights shed on the interpretation of the New Testament has been the discovery and the publication of the papyri. In the ancient world, papyrus was the substance on which most documents were written. It was composed of strips of the pith of a certain bulrush that grew on the banks of the Nile. These strips were laid one on top of the other to form a substance very like brown paper. The sands of the Egyptian desert were ideal for preservation, for papyrus, although very brittle, will last forever so long as moisture does not get at it. As a result, from the Egyptian rubbish heaps, archaeologists have rescued hundreds of documents, marriage contracts, legal agreements, government forms, and, most interesting of all, private letters. When we read these private letters we find that there was a pattern to which nearly all conformed; and we find that Paulletters reproduce exactly that pattern. Here is one of these ancient letters. It is from a soldier, called Apion, to his father Epimachus. He is writing from Misenum to tell his father that he has arrived safely after a stormy passage.

"Apion sends heartiest greetings to his father and lord Epimachus.

I pray above all that you are well and fit; and that things are

going well with you and my sister and her daughter and my brother.

I thank my Lord Serapis [his god] that he kept me safe when I was

in peril on the sea. As soon as I got to Misenum I got my journey

money from Caesar--three gold pieces. And things are going fine

with me. So I beg you, my dear father, send me a line, first to

let me know how you are, and then about my brothers, and thirdly,

that I may kiss your hand, because you brought me up well, and

because of that I hope, God willing, soon to be promoted. Give

Capito my heartiest greetings, and my brothers and Serenilla and

my friends. I sent you a little picture of myself painted by

Euctemon. My military name is Antonius Maximus, I pray for your

good health. Serenus sends good wishes, Agathos Daimonboy, and

Turbo, Galloniuson." (G. Milligan, Selections from the Greek

Papyri, 36).

Little did Apion think that we would be reading his letter to his father 1800 years after he had written it. It shows how little human nature changes. The lad is hoping for promotion quickly. Who will Serenilla be but the girl he left behind him? He sends the ancient equivalent of a photograph to the folk at home. Now that letter falls into certain sections. (i) There is a greeting. (ii) There is a prayer for the health of the recipients. (iii) There is a thanksgiving to the gods. (iv) There are the special contents. (v) Finally, there are the special salutations and the personal greetings. Practically every one of Paulletters shows exactly the same sections, as we now demonstrate.

(i) The Greeting: Rom_1:1 ; 1Co_1:1 ; 2Co_1:1 ; Gal_1:1 ; Eph_1:1 ; Phi_1:1 ; Col_1:1-2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:1 .

(ii) The Prayer: in every case Paul prays for the grace of God on the people to whom he writes: Rom_1:7 ; 1Co_1:3 ; 2Co_1:2 ; Gal_1:3 ; Eph_1:2 ; Phi_1:3 ; Col_1:2 ; 1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:2 .

(iii) The Thanksgiving: Rom_1:8 ; 1Co_1:4 ; 2Co_1:3 ; Eph_1:3 ; Phi_1:3 ; 1Th_1:3 ; 2Th_1:3 .

(iv) The Special Contents: the main body of the letters.

(v) Special Salutations and Personal Greetings: Rom 16 ; 1Co_16:19 ; 2Co_13:13 ; Phi_4:21-22 ; Col_4:12-15 ; 1Th_5:26 .

When Paul wrote letters, he wrote them on the pattern which everyone used. Deissmann says of them, "They differ from the messages of the homely papyrus leaves of Egypt, not as letters but only as the letters of Paul." When we read Paulletters we are not reading things which were meant to be academic exercises and theological treatises, but human documents written by a friend to his friends.

The Immediate Situation

With a very few exceptions, all Paulletters were written to meet an immediate situation and not treatises which he sat down to write in the peace and silence of his study. There was some threatening situation in Corinth, or Galatia, or Philippi, or Thessalonica, and he wrote a letter to meet it. He was not in the least thinking of us when he wrote, but solely of the people to whom he was writing. Deissmann writes, "Paul had no thought of adding a few fresh compositions to the already extant Jewish epistles; still less of enriching the sacred literature of his nation.... He had no presentiment of the place his words would occupy in universal history; not so much that they would be in existence in the next generation, far less that one day people would look at them as Holy Scripture." We must always remember that a thing need not be transient because it was written to meet an immediate situation. All the great love songs of the world were written for one person, but they live on for the whole of mankind. It is just because Paulletters were written to meet a threatening danger or a clamant need that they still throb with life. And it is because human need and the human situation do not change that God speaks to us through them today.

The Spoken Word

One other thing we must note about these letters. Paul did what most people did in his day. He did not normally pen his own letters but dictated them to a secretary, and then added his own authenticating signature. (We actually know the name of one of the people who did the writing for him. In Rom_16:22 Tertius, the secretary, slips in his own greeting before the letter draws to an end). In 1Co_16:21 Paul says, "This is my own signature, my autograph, so that you can be sure this letter comes from me." (compare Col_4:18 ; 2Th_3:17 .

This explains a great deal. Sometimes Paul is hard to understand, because his sentences begin and never finish; his grammar breaks down and the construction becomes involved. We must not think of him sitting quietly at a desk, carefully polishing each sentence as he writes. We must think of him striding up and down some little room, pouring out a torrent of words, while his secretary races to get them down. When Paul composed his letters, he had in his mindeye a vision of the folk to whom he was writing, and he was pouring out his heart to them in words that fell over each other in his eagerness to help.

INTRODUCTION TO THE LETTERS TO THE CORINTHIANS

The Greatness Of Corinth

A glance at the map will show that Corinth was made for greatness. The southern part of Greece is very nearly an island. On the west the Corinthian Gulf deeply indents the land and on the east the Saronic Gulf. All that is left to join the two parts of Greece together is a little isthmus only four miles across. On that narrow neck of land Corinth stands. Such a position made it inevitable that it should be one of the greatest trading and commercial centres of the ancient world. All traffic from Athens and the north of Greece to Sparta and the Peloponnese had to be routed through Corinth, because it stood on the little neck of land that connected the two.

Not only did the north to south traffic of Greece pass through Corinth of necessity, by far the greater part of the east to west traffic of the Mediterranean passed through her from choice. The extreme southern tip of Greece was known as Cape Malea (now called Cape Matapan). It was dangerous, and to round Cape Malea had much the same sound as to round Cape Horn had in later times. The Greeks had two sayings which showed what they thought of it--"Let him who sails round Malea forget his home," and, "Let him who sails round Malea first make his will."

The consequence was that mariners followed one of two courses. They sailed up the Saronic Gulf, and, if their ships were small enough, dragged them out of the water, set them on rollers, hauled them across the isthmus, and re-launched them on the other side. The isthmus was actually called the Diolkos, the place of dragging across. The idea is the same as that which is contained in the Scottish place name Tarbert, which means a place where the land is so narrow that a boat can be dragged from loch to loch. If that course was not possible because the ship was too large, the cargo was disembarked, carried by porters across the isthmus, and re-embarked on another ship at the other side. This four mile journey across the isthmus, where the Corinth Canal now runs, saved a journey of two hundred and two miles round Cape Malea, the most dangerous cape in the Mediterranean.

It is easy to see how great a commercial city Corinth must have been. The north to south traffic of Greece had no alternative but to pass through her; by far the greater part of the east to west trade of the Mediterranean world chose to pass through her. Round Corinth there clustered three other towns, Lechaeum at the west end of the isthmus, Cenchrea at the east end and Schoenus just a short distance away. Farrar writes, "Objects of luxury soon found their way to the markets which were visited by every nation in the civilized world--Arabian balsam, Phoenician dates, Libyan ivory, Babylonian carpets, Cilician goatsair, Lycaonian wool, Phrygian slaves."

Corinth, as Farrar calls her, was the Vanity Fair of the ancient world. Men called her The Bridge of Greece; one called her The Lounge of Greece. It has been said that if a man stands long enough in Piccadilly Circus he will in the end meet everyone in the country. Corinth was the Piccadilly Circus of the Mediterranean. To add to the concourse which came to it, Corinth was the place where the Isthmian Games were held, which were second only to the Olympics. Corinth was a rich and populous city with one of the greatest commercial trades in the ancient world.

The Wickedness Of Corinth

There was another side to Corinth. She had a reputation for commercial prosperity, but she was also a byword for evil living. The very word korinthiazesthai, to live like a Corinthian, had become a part of the Greek language, and meant to live with drunken and immoral debauchery. The word actually penetrated to the English language, and, in Regency times, a Corinthian was one of the wealthy young bucks who lived in reckless and riotous living. Aelian, the late Greek writer, tells us that if ever a Corinthian was shown upon the stage in a Greek play he was shown drunk. The very name Corinth was synonymous with debauchery and there was one source of evil in the city which was known all over the civilized world. Above the isthmus towered the hill of the Acropolis, and on it stood the great temple of Aphrodite, the goddess of love. To that temple there were attached one thousand priestesses who were sacred prostitutes, and in the evenings they descended from the Acropolis and plied their trade upon the streets of Corinth, until it became a Greek proverb, "It is not every man who can afford a journey to Corinth." In addition to these cruder sins, there flourished far more recondite vices, which had come in with the traders and the sailors from the ends of the earth, until Corinth became not only a synonym for wealth and luxury, drunkenness and debauchery, but also for filth.

The History Of Corinth

The history of Corinth falls into two parts. She was a very ancient city. Thucydides, the Greek historian, claims that it was in Corinth that the first triremes, the Greek battleships, were built. Legend has it that it was in Corinth that the Argo was built, the ship in which Jason sailed the seas, searching for the golden fleece. But in 146 B.C. disaster befell her. The Romans were engaged in conquering the world. When they sought to reduce Greece, Corinth was the leader of the opposition. But the Greeks could not stand against the disciplined Romans, and in 146 B.C. Lucius Mummius, the Roman general, captured Corinth and left her a desolate heap of ruins.

But any place with the geographical situation of Corinth could not remain a devastation. Almost exactly one hundred years later, in 46 B.C. Julius Caesar rebuilt her and she arose from her ruins. Now she became a Roman colony. More, she became a capital city, the metropolis of the Roman province of Achaea, which included practically all Greece.

In those days, which were the days of Paul, her population was very mixed. (i) There were the Roman veterans whom Julius Caesar had settled there. When a Roman soldier had served his time, he was granted the citizenship and was then sent out to some newly-founded city and given a grant of land so that he might become a settler there. These Roman colonies were planted all over the world, and always the backbone of them was the contingent of veteran regular soldiers whose faithful service had won them the citizenship. (ii) When Corinth was rebuilt the merchants came back, for her situation still gave her commercial supremacy. (iii) There were many Jews among the population. The rebuilt city offered them commercial opportunities which they were not slow to take. (iv) There was a sprinkling of Phoenicians and Phrygians and people from the east, with their exotic customs and their hysterical ways. Farrar speaks of "this mongrel and heterogeneous population of Greek adventurers and Roman bourgeois, with a tainting infusion of Phoenicians; this mass of Jews, ex-soldiers, philosophers, merchants, sailors, freedmen, slaves, trades-people, hucksters and agents of every form of vice." He characterizes her as a colony "without aristocracy, without traditions and without well-established citizens."

Remember the background of Corinth, remember its name for wealth and luxury, for drunkenness and immorality and vice, and then read 1Co_6:9-10 .

Are you not aware that the unrighteous will not inherit the

Kingdom of God? Make no mistake--neither fornicators, nor

idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sensualists, nor homosexuals, nor

thieves, nor rapacious men, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor

robbers shall inherit the Kingdom of God--and such were some of

you.

In this hotbed of vice, in the most unlikely place in all the Greek world, some of Paulgreatest work was done, and some of the mightiest triumphs of Christianity were won.

Paul In Corinth

Paul stayed longer in Corinth than in any other city, with the single exception of Ephesus. He had left Macedonia with his life in peril and had crossed over to Athens. There he had had little success and had gone on to Corinth, and he remained there for eighteen months. We realize how little we really know of his work when we see that the whole story of that eighteen months is compressed by Luke into 17 verses (Act_18:1-17 ).

When Paul arrived in Corinth he took up residence with Aquila and Prisca. He preached in the synagogue with great success. With the arrival of Timothy and Silas from Macedonia, he redoubled his efforts, but the Jews were so stubbornly hostile that he had to leave the synagogue. He took up his residence with one Justus who lived next door to the synagogue. His most notable convert was Crispus, who was actually the ruler of the synagogue, and amongst the general public he had good success.

In the year A.D. 52 there came to Corinth as its new governor a Roman called Gallio. He was famous for his charm and gentleness. The Jews tried to take advantage of his newness and good nature and brought Paul to trial before him on a charge of teaching contrary to their law. But Gallio, with impartial Roman justice, refused to have anything to do with the case or to take any action. So Paul completed his work in Corinth and moved on to Syria.

The Correspondence With Corinth

It was when he was in Ephesus in the year A.D. 55 that Paul, learning that things were not all well in Corinth, wrote to the church there. There is every possibility that the Corinthian correspondence as we have it is out of order. We must remember that it was not until A.D. 90 or thereby that Paulcorrespondence was collected. In many churches it must have existed only on scraps of papyrus and the putting it together would be a problem: and it seems that, when the Corinthian letters were collected, they were not all discovered and were not arranged in the right order. Let us see if we can reconstruct what happened.

(i) There was a letter which preceded 1 Corinthians. In 1Co_5:9 Paul writes, "I wrote you a letter not to associate with immoral men." This obviously refers to some previous letter. Some scholars believe that letter is lost without trace. Others think it is contained in 2Co_6:14-18 and 2Co_7:1 . Certainly that passage suits what Paul said he wrote about. It occurs rather awkwardly in its context, and, if we take it out and read straight on from 2Co_6:13 to 2Co_7:2 , we get excellent sense and connection. Scholars call this letter The Previous Letter. (In the original letters there were no chapter or verse divisions. The chapters were not divided up until the thirteenth century and the verses not till the sixteenth, and because of that the arranging of the collection of letters would be much more difficult).

(ii) News came to Paul from various sources of trouble at Corinth. (a) News came from those who were of the household of Chloe (1Co_1:11 ). They brought news of the contentions with which the church was torn. (b) News came with the visit of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus to Ephesus. (1Co_16:17 ). By personal contact they were able to fill up the gaps in Paulinformation. (c) News came in a letter in which the Corinthian Church had asked Paul guidance on various problems. In 1Co_7:1 Paul begins, "Concerning the matters about which you wrote..." In answer to all this information Paul wrote 1 Corinthians and despatched it to Corinth apparently by the hand of Timothy (1Co_4:17 ).

(iii) The result of the letter was that things became worse than ever, and, although we have no direct record of it, we can deduce that Paul paid a personal visit to Corinth. In 2Co_12:14 he writes, "The third time I am ready to come to you." In 2Co_13:1-2 , he says again that he is coming to them for the third time. Now, if there was a third time, there must have been a second time. We have the record of only one visit, whose story is told in Act_18:1-17 . We have no record at all of the second, but Corinth was only two or three daysailing from Ephesus.

(iv) The visit did no good at all. Matters were only exacerbated and the result was an exceedingly severe letter. We learn about that letter from certain passages in 2 Corinthians. In 2Co_2:4 Paul writes, "I wrote to you out of much affliction and anguish of heart and with many tears." In 2Co_7:8 he writes, "For even if I made you sorry with my letter, I do not regret it though I did regret it; for I see that that letter has grieved you, though only for a while." It was a letter which was the product of anguish of mind, a letter so severe that Paul was almost sorry that he ever sent it.

Scholars call this The Severe Letter. Have we got it? It obviously cannot be I Corinthians, because it is not a tear-stained and anguished letter. When Paul wrote it, it is clear enough that things were under control. Now if we read through 2 Corinthians we find an odd circumstance. In 2Cor 1-9 everything is made up, there is complete reconciliation and all are friends again; but at 2Cor 10 comes the strangest break. 2Cor 10-13 are the most heartbroken cry Paul ever wrote. They show that he has been hurt and insulted as he never was before or afterwards by any church. His appearance, his speech, his apostleship, his honesty have all been under attack.

Most scholars believe that 2Cor 10-13 are the severe letter, and that they have become misplaced when Paulletters were put together. If we want the real chronological course of Paulcorrespondence with Corinth, we really ought to read 2Cor 10-13 before 2Cor 1-9. We do know that this letter was sent off with Titus. (2Co_2:13 ; 2Co_7:13 ).

(v) Paul was worried about this letter. He could not wait until Titus came back with an answer, so he set out to meet him (2Co_2:13 ; 2Co_7:5 , 2Co_7:13 ). Somewhere in Macedonia he met him and learned that all was well, and, probably at Philippi, he sat down and wrote 2Cor 1-9, the letter of reconciliation.

Stalker has said that the letters of Paul take the roof off the early churches and let us see what went on inside. Of none of them is that truer than the letters to Corinth. Here we see what "the care of all the churches" must have meant to Paul. Here we see the heart-breaks and the joys. Here we see Paul, the shepherd of his flock, bearing the sorrows and the problems of his people on his heart.

The Corinthian Correspondence

Before we read the letters in detail let us set down the progress of the Corinthian correspondence in tabular form.

(i) The Previous Letter, which may be contained in 2Co_6:14-18 and 2Co_7:1 .

(ii) The arrival of Chloepeople, of Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus, and of the letter to Paul from the Corinthian Church.

(iii) 1 Corinthians is written in reply and is despatched with Timothy.

(iv) The situation grows worse and Paul pays a personal visit to Corinth, which is so complete a failure that it almost breaks his heart.

(v) The consequence is The Severe Letter, which is almost certainly contained in 2Cor 10-13, and which was despatched with Titus.

(vi) Unable to wait for an answer, Paul sets out to meet Titus. He meets him in Macedonia, learns that all is well and, probably from Philippi, writes 2Cor 1-9, The Letter of Reconciliation.

The first four chapters of 1 Corinthians deal with the divided state of the Church of God at Corinth. Instead of being a unity in Christ it was split into sects and parties, who had attached themselves to the names of various leaders and teachers. It is Paulteaching that these divisions had emerged because the Corinthians thought too much about human wisdom and knowledge and too little about the sheer grace of God. In fact, for all their so-called wisdom, they are really in a state of immaturity. They think that they are wise men, but really they are no better than babies.

FURTHER READING

1 Corinthians

F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (NCB; E)

J. Hering, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (translated by A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock)

J. Moffatt, 1 Corinthians (MC; E)

A. Robertson and A. Plummer, 1 Corinthians (ICC; G)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

NCB: New Century Bible

TC: Tyndale Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 1 Corinthians 9 (Chapter Introduction)

The Unclaimed Privileges (1Co_9:1-14)

The Privilege And The Task (1Co_9:15-23)

A Real Fight (1Co_9:24-27)

Constable: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical Background

Corinth had a long history stretching back into the Bronze Age (before 1200 B.C.).¹ In Paul's day it was a Roman colony and the capital of the province of Achaia. The population consisted of Roman citizens who had migrated from Italy, native Greeks, Jews (Acts 18:4), and other people from various places who chose to settle there.

The ancient city of Corinth enjoyed an ideal situation as a commercial center. It stood just southwest of the Isthmus of Corinth, the land bridge that connected Northern Greece and Southern Greece, the Peloponnesus. This site made Corinth a crossroads for trade by land, north and south, as well as by sea, east and west. In Paul's day large ships would transfer their cargoes to land vehicles that would cart them from the Corinthian Gulf to the Saronic Gulf, or vice versa. There stevedores would reload them onto other ships. If a ship was small enough, they would drag the whole vessel across the four and a half mile isthmus from one gulf to the other. This did away with the long voyage around the Peloponnesus. Later the Greeks cut a canal linking these two gulfs.²

Corinth's strategic location brought commerce and all that goes with it to its populace: wealth, a steady stream of travelers and merchants, and vice. In Paul's day many of the pagan religions included prostitution as part of the worship of their god or goddess. Consequently fornication flourished in Corinth.

"Old Corinth had gained such a reputation for sexual vice that Aristophanes (ca. 450-385 B.C.) coined the verb korinthiazo (= to act like a Corinthian, i.e., to commit fornication)."³

"The old city had been the most licentious city in Greece, and perhaps the most licentious city in the Empire."⁴

The most notorious shrine was the temple of Aphrodite that stood on top of an approximately 1,900 foot high mountain just south of the city, the Acrocorinthus. Hundreds of female slaves served the men who "worshipped" there.⁵ Other major deities honored in Corinth included Melicertes, the patron of seafarers, and Poseidon, the sea god.

"All of this evidence together suggests that Paul's Corinth was at once the New York, Los Angeles, and Las Vegas of the ancient world."⁶

There were several other local sites of importance to the student of 1 Corinthians. These included the bema (judgment seat or platform), the place where judges tried important cases including Paul's (Acts 18:12).⁷ Cenchrea, the port of Corinth on the Saronic Gulf of the Aegean Sea, was the town from which Paul set sail for Ephesus during his second missionary journey (Acts 18:18). Isthmia was another little town east of Corinth, just north of Cenchrea, that hosted the Isthmian Games every two or three years. These athletic contests were important in the life of the Greeks, and Paul referred to them in this epistle (9:24-27).

Paul had arrived in Corinth first from Athens, which lay to the east. There he preached the gospel and planted a church. There, too, he met Priscilla and Aquila, Jews who had recently left Rome. After local Jewish officials expelled the church from the synagogue, it met in a large house next door that Titius Justus owned. Paul ministered in Corinth for 18 months, probably in 51 and 52 A.D. He left taking Priscilla and Aquila with him to Ephesus. Paul then proceeded on to Syrian Antioch by way of Caesarea.

Returning to Ephesus on his third journey Paul made that city his base of operations for almost three years (53-56 A.D.). There he heard disquieting news about immorality in the Corinthian church. Therefore he wrote a letter urging the believers not to tolerate such conduct in their midst. Paul referred to this letter as his "former letter" (1 Cor. 5:9). It is not extant today.

Then he heard from "Chloe's people" that factions had developed in the church. He also received a letter from the church in Corinth requesting his guidance in certain matters. These matters were marriage, divorce, food offered to idols, the exercise of spiritual gifts in the church, and the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem. Those who carried this letter also reported other disturbing conditions in the church. These conditions were the condoning rather than disciplining of immorality, Christians suing one another in the pagan courts, and disorders in their church meetings. These factors led Paul to compose another letter, "1 Corinthians." In it he dealt with the problem of factions, promised to visit them soon, and said he was sending Timothy to Corinth (chs. 1-4). Paul added his responses to the Corinthians' questions to what he had already written. He dealt next with the oral reports (chs. 5-6) and then with the questions that the Corinthian believers had written to him (chs. 7-16). He evidently sent this epistle from Ephesus by trusted messengers in the late winter or early spring of 56 A.D. (cf. 16:8).

It seems that a conflict had developed between the Corinthian church and its founder. There was internal strife in the church, as the epistle makes clear. However the larger problem seems to have been that some in the community were leading the church into a view of things that was contrary to that of Paul. This resulted in a questioning of Paul's authority and his gospel. The key issue between Paul and the Corinthians was what it means to be "spiritual."⁸

"It [1 Corinthians] is not the fullest and clearest statement of Paul's Gospel; for this we must turn to Romans. Nor is it the letter that shows Paul's own heart most clearly, for in this respect it is surpassed by 2 Corinthians, and perhaps by other epistles too. But it has the great value of showing theology at work, theology being used as it was intended to be used, in the criticism and establishing of persons, institutions, practices, and ideas."⁹

Paul's Corinthian Contacts
Paul's founding visit	His "former letter"	The Corin-thians' letter to him	First Corin-thians	Paul's "painful visit"	His "severe letter"	Second Corin-thians	Paul's antici-pated visit

Message¹⁰

A phrase in 1:2 suggests the theme of this great epistle. That phrase is "the church of God which is at Corinth." Two entities are in view in this phrase and these are the two entities with which the whole epistle deals. They are the church of God and the city of Corinth. The church of God is a community of people who share the life of God, are under the governing will of God, and cooperate in the work of God. The city of Corinth was ignorant of the life of God, governed by self-will, and antagonistic to the purposes of God. These two entities stand in vivid contrast to one another and account for the conflict we find in this epistle.

The church of God in view in this epistle is not the universal church but the local church. These two churches are really not that different from one another. The local church is the micro form of the universal church. Moreover the universal church is the macro form of the local church. What is true of one is true of the other. Whatever we find in a local church exists on a larger scale in the universal church. Whatever we find in one local church exists in many local churches. Remember that the New Testament consistently speaks of the church as people, not buildings. The Apostle Paul addressed these people as believers because that is what they were. Today there may be quite a few unsaved people in a local church's membership. This was not the case in the first century. Believers composed local churches. They shared the life of God because the Holy Spirit indwelt them. They had submitted to God's rule over them to some extent. They were people whom God had commissioned to carry the gospel to every creature. We need to bear these things in mind as we read about the church of God in Corinth.

The city of Corinth is the other entity of primary importance in our grasping the major significance of this epistle. What characterizes the world generally marked Corinth. In the first century when other people described a person as a Corinthian they were implying that lust, lasciviousness, and luxury characterized that one. These were the marks of Corinth. Corinth as a city was ignorant of the true God, entirely self-governing as a Roman colony, and self-centered in her world. These traits marked the lives of individual unbelievers in Corinth as well. The city was going in the opposite direction from the direction God had called the church to go.

The atmosphere of this epistle is Paul's concept of the responsibilities of the church in the city. The apostle articulated this underlying emphasis in 1:9. Fellowship involves both privilege and responsibility. On the one hand, all God's resources are at our disposal. On the other hand, all our resources should be at His disposal as well. The church in any place has a debt to the people who live there to proclaim the gospel to them (Rom. 1:14-16). Paul wrote this whole letter out of an underlying sense of the church's responsibility for the city where it existed.

The church in Corinth was struggling to discharge its debt. It was failing in some very important areas: in readiness, in courage, and in conviction to declare the gospel. The Corinthian church was a carnal church. However, its carnality, as big a problem as that was, was only part of a larger problem. The bigger problem was its failure to carry out its God-given purpose in the city, namely to proclaim a powerful spiritual message to the city. The Christians could not fulfill their purpose unless they dealt with their carnality. Why is carnality wrong? It is wrong because it keeps us from fulfilling the purpose for which God has left us on this planet.

In this letter we discover the causes of the church's failure. Another major emphasis is the secrets of the church's success. On the one hand, we find correctives of carnality. On the other, we have construction of spirituality. Let's consider the causes of failure first.

The first cause of failure was the fact that the spirit of the city had invaded the church as a virus. Every evil thing in the church to which Paul referred was prevalent in Corinth. Three things merit particular mention.

One of the symptoms of Corinthian cultural influence was intellectual freedom. There was much interest in intellectual speculation in Corinth as there was in its neighbor city of Athens. The phrase "Corinthian words" was a synonym for rhetoric in Paul's day. Corinth glorified human wisdom. The Corinthians discussed and debated all sorts of opinions. Each intellectual leader had his group of disciples. Discussion of every subject under the sun prevailed with great diversity of opinion. Unfortunately this spirit had invaded the church. There was a veneration of human wisdom among the Christians. They had chosen their own Christian leaders whom they followed as disciples (ch. 1). Intellectual restlessness prevailed in the church as well as in the city. The believers sampled Christian teaching as the general populace dabbled in philosophical argumentation. This extended to such fundamental doctrines as the Resurrection (ch. 15).

Another evidence that the city had invaded the church was the moral laxity that prevailed. Intellectual permissiveness led to the lowering of moral standards. When people view any idea as legitimate, there are few moral absolutes. The worship of Aphrodite on the hill behind the city was extremely immoral, but the unsaved citizens viewed this worship as perfectly acceptable. "Live and let live" was their motto. Regrettably some Corinthians in the church were viewing morals in the same way (ch. 5).

A third mark of the city's effect on the church was personal selfishness. In the city every person did what was right in his own eyes. The result was there was very little concern for other people and their welfare. One of the evidences of this attitude in the church was the Christians' behavior in their meetings. They were not sharing their food with one another (ch. 11). They were also interrupting speakers in the meetings rather than waiting for the speaker to finish what he had to say (ch. 14). Where edification and order should have prevailed, self-glorification and chaos reigned.

These were only symptoms of a deeper problem. The real root issue was that the church had failed to recognize its uniqueness. The Christians had not grasped and retained some central truths the apostles had taught them that identified the essence of their Christianity. Paul reminded them of these things in this epistle.

They had forgotten the central importance of the message of the Cross of Christ. This was a message not subject to debate. It rested on eyewitness testimony and divine revelation, not human speculation. Christians should unite around this message, share a common commitment to it, and make it the subject of their proclamation. We should appreciate the unity of the body of Christ while at the same time glorying in the diversity of its leaders.

The Corinthians had also forgotten the central importance of the power of the resurrection of Christ. The same power that raised Christ from the dead is at work in Christians to enable us to live morally pure lives. Immorality is not an option for the believer. One of the most outstanding marks of a Christian should be purity. Because Jesus Christ was pure, we should be pure. Because He was pure, we can be pure.

The Corinthians had also forgotten the importance of Christ's command that we love one another. Selfishness had invaded the church. The believers needed to put the welfare of others, their fellow believers and their unsaved neighbors, before their own personal inclinations and preferences.

One of the central revelations of this epistle then is that the church fails to fulfill her function in the city (i.e., culture) when the spirit of the city invades her. The church allows the spirit of the city to invade her when she forgets that God wants her to be unique. The church fails when it adopts the ideas and activities of its environment rather than those revealed for it in God's Word. In view of this, Paul constantly appealed to his readers to be what they were in reality. We are not the people we were. We are saints (1:2). We need to remember that and act accordingly. We do not need to catch the spirit of our age. We need to correct the spirit of our age. When the church catches the spirit of its age, it catches a disease and becomes anemic, weak, and sickly. We avoid catching this spirit by staying spiritually healthy and by constantly imbibing the message of the Cross. We do it by exercising the power of the Resurrection and by keeping others rather than self primary.

I have already begun to hint at the secrets of the church's success, the second major revelation in this epistle.

The church must realize what it is to fulfill its function in the city. We must appreciate our life in Christ.

The life of the church is the life of an organism (ch. 12). It has one Lord whose life we share. It has one Spirit who governs it distributing abilities, assigning positions, and determining results as He sees fit in view of God's overall purpose. The church has one God--not many as in Corinth--whose glory it should determine to promote. To the extent a church realizes these truths, it will be ready to be successful in the sight of God. If it shares the spiritual life of her Lord, submits to the Spirit's leading, and seeks to glorify God, it will succeed. By separating from the spirit of the city, it can help and lift the city.

The law of the church must be the law of love. This is the opposite of the selfish outlook. Paul emphasized the importance of love in chapter 13.

The power of the church is the Resurrection life of Christ (ch. 15). We presently live between two resurrections, the resurrection of Christ and our own resurrection. These resurrections are facts of history. One has already taken place, and the other is yet to come. Between these resurrections the church must fulfill its function in the world. The life that God has given to every believer is life that has power over death. One who overcame death has given it to us. This life is essentially different from what unbelievers possess. It is eternal divine life. With such life we can face any enemy as we serve God. Even the final enemy, death, cannot hold us. It could not hold Him who gave us His life.

Not only must we appreciate the uniqueness of our life as a church to fulfill our function, but we must also fulfill our function by invading the city. Rather than allowing it to invade us, we must invade it to be successful.

We do this by proclaiming that Jesus is Lord. He is the only Lord. The proof of this is His resurrection.

We also do this by rebuking the immorality of the city, not just by decrying it but, what is more important, by overcoming it in our own lives. We do it by demonstrating the power of Christ's life within us by living morally pure lives.

Third, we do this by counteracting the selfishness of our culture by practicing genuine Christian love. This means living for the glory of God and the good of others rather than putting self first.

The church always fails when it becomes conformed to the maxims, methods, and manners of the city--the world in which it lives. It always succeeds when it stands separate from the city and touches it with its supernatural healing life.

This epistle calls the church in every age to recognize its responsibility to its city. The church is responsible for the intellectual, moral, and social conditions in its city. Unfortunately many churches believe they exist merely to conserve the life of their members. We live in a cultural climate very similar to the one in which the Corinthian Christians lived. It is a culture characterized by intellectual pluralism, situation ethics, and personal selfishness. We face the same challenge the Corinthian believers did. Consequently what this epistle reveals is extremely relevant for us. We have responsibility for how people in our city think, how they behave, and whom they glorify. What they need is the message of the Cross delivered in the power of the Resurrection.

This letter is also a call to separation.

First, we must separate from absolute intellectual freedom and willingly submit our understanding and thinking to the revelation that God has given us in Scripture (chs. 1-4). There is a growing notion that all religions lead to God. Increasingly we hear that it does not matter too much what someone believes because we will all end up in the same place eventually. We need to counter that view with the revelation of the exclusive way of salvation that God has provided for people who are hopelessly lost and dead in their sins.

God has also called us to separation from moral laxity. Our culture is playing down personal morality and marital morality today. We need to proclaim the standards of God in these areas even though we may face strong opposition for doing so. Paul held these standards up in chapters 5-7.

Likewise we need to separate from selfish living. We need to make a break with goals and plans designed to glorify ourselves. Instead we need to evaluate all of our activities by the standard of chapter 13.

By way of application we can conclude several things from these observations about the emphases in this epistle.

First, the influence of the church is the influence of its individual members. The sum of its individual members' influence is the church's influence. Everything that is true of the church, therefore, is true of the individual believer in it to some extent.

Second, there should be perpetual conflict between the church and the city. If there is no conflict, the church is not having its proper influence. It may be that the city has invaded the church.

Third, the message of the church must ever be the message of the Cross and the Resurrection. It is a message of failure and success, of success out of failure. That is the message of hope the city needs to hear. Consequently we need to "be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord," because we know that our labor is not in vain in the Lord (15:58).

Constable: 1 Corinthians (Outline)

Outline

I. Introduction 1:1-9

A. Salutation 1:1-3

B. Thanksgiving 1:4-9

II. Conditions reported to Paul 1:10-6:20

A. Divisions in the church 1:10-4:21

1. The manifestation of the problem 1:10-17

2. The gospel as a contradiction to human wisdom 1:18-2:5

3. The Spirit's ministry of revealing God's wisdom 2:6-16

4. The spiritual yet carnal condition 3:1-4

5. The role of God's servants 3:5-17

6. Human wisdom and limited blessing 3:18-23

7. The Corinthians' relationship with Paul 4:1-21

B. Lack of discipline in the church chs. 5-6

1. Incest in the church ch. 5

2. Litigation in the church 6:1-11

3. Prostitution in the church 6:12-20

III. Questions asked of Paul 7:1-16:12

A. Marriage and related matters ch. 7

1. Advice to the married or formerly married 7:1-16

2. Basic principles 7:17-24

3. Advice concerning virgins 7:25-40

B. Food offered to idols 8:1-11:1

1. The priority of love over knowledge in Christian conduct ch. 8

2. Paul's apostolic defense ch. 9

3. The sinfulness of idolatry 10:1-22

4. The issue of marketplace food 10:23-11:1

C. Propriety in worship 11:2-16

1. The argument from culture 11:2-6

2. The argument from creation 11:7-12

3. The argument from propriety 11:13-16

D. The Lord's Supper 11:17-34

1. The abuses 11:17-26

2. The correctives 11:27-34

E. Spiritual gifts and spiritual people chs. 12-14

1. The test of Spirit control 12:1-3

2. The need for varieties of spiritual gifts 12:4-31

3. The supremacy of love ch. 13

4. The need for intelligibility 14:1-25

5. The need for order 14:26-40

F. The resurrection of believers ch. 15

l. The resurrection of Jesus Christ 15:1-11

2. The certainty of resurrection 15:12-34

3. The resurrection body 15:35-49

4. The assurance of victory over death 15:50-58

G. The collection for the Jerusalem believers 16:1-12

1. Arrangements for the collection 16:1-4

2. The travel plans of Paul and his fellow apostles 16:5-12

IV. Conclusion 16:13-24

A. Final exhortations 16:13-18

B. Final greetings and benediction 16:19-24

Constable: 1 Corinthians

1 Corinthians

Bibliography

Adams, Jay. Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible. Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980.

Andrews, J. N. "May Women Speak in Meeting?" Review and Herald. January 2, 1879. Reprinted in Adventist Review 165:5 (February 4, 1988):17.

Barclay, William. By What Authority? Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1974.

_____. The Letters to the Corinthians. Daily Study Bible series. Second ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1956.

Barrett, Charles Kingsley. A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Harper's New Testament Commentaries series. New York: Harper & Row, 1968.

Bassler, Jouette M. "Paul's Theology: Whence and Whither?" In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 3-17. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Batey, Richard. "Paul's Interaction with the Corinthians." Journal of Biblical Literature 84 (1965):139-46.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Bedale, Stephen. "The Meaning of kephale in the Pauline Epistles." Journal of Theological Studies NS5 (1954):211-15.

Beet, J. Agar. A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians. 6th ed. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1895.

Berding, Kenneth. "Confusing Word and Concept in Spiritual Gifts': Have We Forgotten James Barr's Exhortations?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:1 (March 200):37-51.

Bilezikian, Gilbert G. Beyond Sex Roles. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985.

Blampied, Anne B. "Paul and Silence for The Women' in I Corinthians 14:34-35." Studia Biblica et Theologica 18:2 (October 1983):143-65.

Blomquist, Jean M. "The Effect of the Divorce Experience on Spiritual Growth." Pastoral Psychology 34:2 (Winter 1985):82-91.

Brindle, Wayne A. "Biblical Evidence for the Imminence of the Rapture." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:630 (April-June 2001):138-51.

Bruce, F. F., ed. 1 and 2 Corinthians. New Century Bible series. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, Oliphants, 1971.

_____. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1982.

Buckley, Jack. "Paul, Women, and the Church." Eternity 31:11 (December 1980):30-35.

Burns, J. Lanier. "A Reemphasis on the Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 132:527 (July-September 1975):242-49.

Caird, George Bradford. Principalities and Powers. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1956.

Calvin, John. The First Epistle of Paul The Apostle to the Corinthians. Translated by John W. Fraser. Edited by David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance. Calvin's Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1973.

_____. Institutes of the Christian Religion. 2 vols. Library of Christian Classics series. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Reprint ed., Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.

Campbell, Barth. "Flesh and Spirit in 1 Cor 5:5: An Exercise in Rhetorical Criticism of the NT." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:3 (September 1993):331-42.

Carson, D. A. The Cross & Christian Ministry: An Exposition of Passages from 1 Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, and Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Chadwick, H. "All Things to All Men' (I Cor. IX. 22)." New Testament Studies 1 (1954-55):261-75.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. He That Is Spiritual. 1918; revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1967.

_____. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948.

Chitwood, Arlen L. Judgment Seat of Christ. Norman, Ok.: The Lamp Broadcast, Inc., 1986.

Clagett, John Y. "The Concept of Conscience and Its Relation to the Christian Ethic in the Corinthian Epistles." Th.M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1971.

Clark, Stephen B. Man and Woman in Christ. Ann Arbor, Mi.: Servant Books, 1980.

Cole, Sherwood A. "Biology, Homosexuality, and Moral Culpability." Bibliotheca Sacra 154:615 (July-September 1997):355-66.

Constable, Robert L. Called Saints: Studies in I Corinthians 1-3 Moody Manna series. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1962.

_____. Live Saints: Studies in I Corinthians 4-16. Moody Manna series. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, 1966.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

_____. "The Gospel Message." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 201-17. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Conybeare, W. J. and Howson, J. S. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul. New ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1964.

Conzelmann, H. 1 Corinthians: A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.

Cousar, Charles B. "Expository Articles: I Corinthians 2:1-13." Interpretation 44:2 (April 1990):169-73.

_____. "The Theological Task of 1 Corinthians." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 90-102. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Dahms, John V. "The Subordination of the Son." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:3 (September 1994):351-64.

Darby, John Nelson. Notes of Readings on the Epistles to the Corinthians. London: Moorish, n.d.

_____. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Decker, Rodney J. "The Church's Relationship to the New Covenant." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):290-305.

Deere, Jack. Surprised by the Power of the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Deluz, Gaston. A Companion to I Corinthians. Edited and translated by Grace E. Watt. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1963.

A Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, Epistles to the," by G. H. Clayton.

A Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, First Epistle to the," by A. Robertson.

_____. S. v. "Lord's Day," by N. J. D. White.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

_____. Speaking in Tongues: Seven Crucial Questions. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975.

Dobbins, Richard. "Two Sinister Forces Undermining Clergy Marriages." Ministries 4:1 (Winter 1985-86):31-32, 39.

Dods, Marcus. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1889.

Dollar, George W. "Church History and the Tongues Movement." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):316-21.

Donfried, K. P. "Justification and Last Judgment in Paul." Interpretation 30:2 (April 1976):140-52.

Edgar, Thomas R. "The Cessation of the Sign Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):371-86.

_____. Miraculous Gifts: Are They for Today? Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1983.

Ellicott, Charles T. St. Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians. London: Longmans, Green, 1887.

Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. "Proclaiming the Lord's Death." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 103-32. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Fairbairn, Patrick. The Typology of Scripture. 2 vols. Sixth ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1876.

Farnell, F. David. "Is the Gift of Prophecy for Today?" Bibliotheca Sacra 149:595 (July-September 1992):277-303; 596 (October-December 1992):387-410; 150:597 (January-March 1993):62-88; and 598 (April-June 1993):171-202.

Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1987.

_____. "Tongues--Least of the Gifts? Some Exegetical Observations on 1 Corinthians 12-14." Pneuma 2 (1980):3-14.

_____. "Toward a Theology of 1 Corinthians." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 37-58. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Fiddes, Paul S. "Woman's Head Is Man:' A Doctrinal Reflection upon a Pauline Text." Baptist Quarterly 31:8 (October 1986):370-83.

Fishbane, Michael, "Through the Looking Glass: Reflections on Ezek 43:3, Num 12:8 and 1 Cor 13:8." Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986):63-74.

Fisk, Bruce K. "Eating Meat Offered to Idols: Corinthian Behavior and Pauline Response in 1 Corinthians 8-10 (A Response to Gordon Fee)," Trinity Journal 10 NS:1 (Spring 1989):49-70.

Foh, Susan T. Women and the Word of God. Philipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1979.

Fung, Ronald Y. K. "The Nature of the Ministry according to Paul," Evangelical Quarterly 54 (1982):129-46.

Furnish, Victor Paul. "Theology in 1 Corinthians." In Pauline Theology. Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians, pp. 59-89. Edited by David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Gaffin, Richard B., Jr. "Life-Giving Spirit': Probing the Center of Paul's Pneumatology." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 41:4 (December 1998):573-89.

Gangel, Kenneth O. "Biblical Feminism and Church Leadership." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:557 (January-March 1983):55-63.

Geisler, Norman L. "The Significance of Christ's Physical Resurrection." Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):148-70.

Geldard, Mark. "Jesus' Teaching on Divorce: Thoughts on the Meaning of porneia in Matthew 5:32 and 19:9." Churchman 92:2 (1978):134-43.

Gilmour, S. M. "Pastoral Care in the New Testament Church." New Testament Studies 10 (1963-64):393-98.

Glenn, Donald R. "Psalm 8 and Hebrews 2: A Case Study in Biblical Hermeneutics and Biblical Theology." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 39-51. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Godet, F. Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. 2 vols. Translated by A. Cusin. Classic Commentary Library series. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1886; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1957.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Gromacki, Robert Glenn. The Modern Tongues Movement. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1967.

Grosheide, F. W. Commentary on the First Epistles to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1953.

Grudem, Wayne. "Does kephale (Head') Mean Source' or Authority Over' in Greek Literature? A survey of 2,336 Examples." Trinity Journal 6NS (1985):38-59.

_____. The Gift of Prophecy in 1 Corinthians. Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1982.

_____. The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today. Westchester, IL: Crossway Books, 1988.

_____ "The Meaning of kephale: A Response to Recent Studies." Trinity Journal 11NS (1990):3-72.

_____. "The Meaning of kephale (head'): An Evaluation of New Evidence, Real and Alleged." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44:1 (March 2001):25-65.

_____. "Prophecy--Yes, But Teaching--No: Paul's Consistent Advocacy of Women's Participation Without Governing Authority." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30:1 (March 1987):11-23.

_____. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.

_____. "Why Christians Can Still Prophesy." Christianity Today, September 16, 1988, pp.29-31, 34-35.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. Edited by Leslie F. Church. 1 vol. ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Heth, William A. and Wenham, Gordon J. Jesus and Divorce. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1984.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. "Evidence from 1 Corinthians 15." In A Case for Premillennialism: A New Consensus, pp. 225-34. Edited by Donald K. Campbell and Jeffrey L. Townsend. Chicago: Moody Press, 1992.

Hill, C. E. "Paul's Understanding of Christ's Kingdom in I Corinthians 15:20-28." Novum Testamentum 30:4 (October 1988):297-320.

Hodge, Charles. A Commentary on 1 & 2 Corinthians. 1857 and 1859; reprint ed. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1983.

Hodges, Zane C. Grace in Eclipse. Dallas: Redencion Viva, 1981.

_____. The Hungry Inherit. Chicago: Moody Press, 1972.

_____. "The Purpose of Tongues." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:479 (July-September 1963):226-33.

Hoehner, Harold W. "The Purpose of Tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:20-25." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 53-66. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

Holmyard, Harold R., III. "Does 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 Refer to Women Praying and Prophesying in Church?" Bibliotheca Sacra 154:616 (October-December 1997):461-72.

Hooker, Morna D. "Authority on Her Head: An Examination of I Cor. XI. 10." New Testament Studies 10 (1963-64):410-16.

Houghton, Myron J. "A Reexamination of 1 Corinthians 13:8-13." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:611 (July-September 1996):344-56.

House, H. Wayne. "Caught in the Middle," Kindred Spirit 13:2 (Summer 1989):12-14.

_____. "The Ministry of Women in the Apostolic and Postapostolic Periods." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:580 (October-December 1988):387-99.

_____. "Resurrection, Reincarnation, and Humanness." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):131-50.

_____. "Should a Woman Prophesy or Preach before Men?" Bibliotheca Sacra 145:578 (April-June 1988):141-61.

_____. "The Speaking of Women and the Prohibition of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:579 (July-September 1988):301-18.

_____. "Tongues and the Mystery Religions of Corinth." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:558 (April-June 1983):134-50.

Howell, Timothy D. "The Church and the AIDS Crisis." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):74-82.

Hoyt, Samuel L. "The Judgment Seat of Christ and Unconfessed Sins." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:545 (January-March 1980):32-40.

_____. "The Negative Aspects of the Christian's Judgment." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:546 (April-June 1980):125-32.

Hullinger, Jerry M. "The Problem of Animal Sacrifices in Ezekiel 40-48." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:607 (July-September 1995):279-89.

Hurd, J. C., Jr., The Origin of I Corinthians. New York: Seabury Press, 1965.

Hurley, James B. Man and Woman In Biblical Perspective. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. S. v. "Corinthians, First Epistle to the," by R. Dykes Shaw.

Ironside, Harry A. Addresses on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1938.

Irvin, Dorothy. "The Ministry of Women in the Early Church: The Archaeological Evidence." Touchstone 4:1 (January 1986):24-33.

Isaksson, Abel. "Marriage and Ministry in the New Temple." Translated by Neil Tomkinson. Th.D. dissertation, University of Uppsala, 1965.

Jackson, Thomas A. "Concerning Spiritual Gifts: A Study of I Corinthians 12." Faith and Mission 7:1 (Fall 1989):61-69.

Jamieson, Robert; Fausset, A. R.; and Brown, David. Commentary Practical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible. Revised ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1961.

Jeremias, Joachim. "Flesh and Blood Cannot Inherit the Kingdom of God." New Testament Studies 2 (1955-56):151-59.

_____. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. London: SCM Press, 1969.

Jewett, Paul K. Man as Male and Female. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975.

Johnson, Elliott E. Expository Hermeneutics: An Introduction. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, Academie Books, 1990.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnson, S. Lewis, Jr. "1 Corinthians." In Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1227-60. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. "The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):309-11.

Justice, Sam. "Clergy Divorce: A Perplexing Problem." Ministries 4:1 (Winter 1985-86):24-25, 29-30.

Keil, C. F. and Delitzsch, Franz. The Pentateuch. 3 vols. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kitchens, Ted G. "Perimeters of Corrective Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):201-13.

Knight, George W., III. The New Testament Teaching on the Role Relationship of Men and Women. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977.

Lacey, W. K. The Family in Classical Greece. London: Thames and Hudson, 1968.

Lampe, W. H. "Church Discipline and the Interpretation of the Epistles to the Corinthians." In Christian History and Interpretation: Studies Presented to John Knox. Edited by W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule, and R. R. Niebuhr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967.

Laney, J. Carl. "The Biblical Practice of Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):353-64.

_____. The Divorce Myth. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1981.

Lange, John Peter, ed. A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 10: Romans and Corinthians, by J. P. Lange, F. R. Fay, and Christian Friedrich Kling. Translated by J. F. Hurst, Daniel W. Poor, and Conway P. Wing.

Lampe, Peter. "Theological Wisdom and the Word About the Cross:' The Rhetorical Scheme in I Corinthians 1-4." Interpretation 44:2 (April 1990):117-31.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of St. Paul's First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. 1937. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

Lester, Andrew D. "Some Observations on the Psychological Effects of Women in Ministry." Review and Expositor 83:1 (Winter 1986):63-70.

Lias, J. J. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Cambridge Greek Testament Commentary series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1888.

Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St Paul. Reprint ed. Winona Lake: Alpha Publications, n.d.

Lightner, Robert P. Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1986.

_____. Speaking in Tongues and Divine Healing. Second ed. Schaumburg, Il.: Regular Baptist Press, 1978.

Lindars, Barnabas. "The Sound of the Trumpet: Paul and Eschatology." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67:2 (Spring 1985):766-82.

Litfin, A. Duane. "Evangelical Feminism: Why Traditionalists Reject It." Bibliotheca Sacra 136:543 (July-September 1979):259-71.

Lowery, David K. "1 Corinthians." In Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament pp. 505-49. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

_____. "The Head Covering and the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:2-34." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):155-63.

_____. "A Theology of Paul's Missionary Epistles." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 243-97. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Malick, David E. "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:600 (October-December 1993):479-92.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. 1 Corinthians. MacArthur New Testament Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1984.

_____. Charismatic Chaos. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

_____. The Charismatics: A Doctrinal Perspective. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979.

_____. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

Mare, W. Harold. "1 Corinthians." In Romans-Galatians. Vol. 10 of Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

McRae, William. Dynamics of Spiritual Gifts. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

Mollenkott, Virginia. Women, Men and the Bible. Nashville: Abingdon, 1977.

Morgan, G. Campbell. The Corinthian Letters of Paul. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1946.

_____. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1958.

Murray, John. Divorce. Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1972.

New Scofield Reference Bible. Edited by E. Schuyler English, et al. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

Oldham, Roger Singleton. "Positional and Functional Equality: An Appraisal of the Major Arguments for the Ordination of Women." Mid-America Theological Journal 9:2 (Fall 1985):1-29.

Olshausen, H. Biblical Commentary on St. Paul's First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1851.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. Pattern for Maturity. Chicago: Moody Press, 1966.

_____. Things to Come. Findlay, Oh: Dunham Publishing Co., 1963.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Poythress, Vern Sheridan. "Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogous to Apostolic Gifts: Affirming Extraordinary Works of the Spirit within Cessationist Theology." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:1 (March 1996):71-101.

Proctor, John. "Fire in God's House: Influence of Malachi 3 in the NT." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36:1 (March 1993):9-14.

Pyne, Robert A. "The Role of the Holy Spirit in Conversion." Bibliotheca Sacra 150:598 (April-June 1993):203-18.

Quine, Jay A. "Court Involvement in Church Discipline." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):60-73, and 594 (April-June 1992):223-36.

Ramm, Bernard. Protestant Biblical Interpretation. Revised ed. Boston: W. A. Wilde Co., 1956.

Ramsay, William M. The Cities of St. Paul. New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1907.

Reaume, John D. "Another Look at 1 Corinthians 15:29, Baptized for the Dead'." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):457-75.

Reese, Alexander. The Approaching Advent of Christ. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1937; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Grand Rapids International Publications, 1975.

Rhyne, C. Thomas. "Expository Articles: I Corinthians 3:1-9." Interpretation 44:2 (April 1990):174-78.

Ridderbos, H. Paul: An Outline of His Theology. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975.

Robertson, Archibald, and Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary series. Second ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rosner, Brian S. "Temple and Holiness in 1 Corinthians 5." Tyndale Bulletin 42 (1991):137-45.

Rosscup, James E. "A New Look at 1 Corinthians 3:12--'Gold, Silver, Precious Stones.'" Master's Seminary Journal 1:1 (Spring (1990):33-51.

Ryrie, Charles C. Balancing the Christian Life. Chicago: Moody Press, 1969.

_____. Basic Theology. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1986.

_____. "Biblical Teaching on Divorce and Remarriage." By the Author, 1981.

_____. "Contrasting Views on Sanctification." In Walvoord: A Tribute, pp. 189-200. Edited by Donald K. Campbell. Chicago: Moody Press, 1982.

_____. The Grace of God. Chicago: Moody Press, 1963.

_____. The Holy Spirit. Handbook of Bible Doctrine series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

_____. The Place of Women in the Church. New York: Macmillan, 1958; reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1968. (A 1978 edition, also published by Moody Press, was titled The Role of Women in the Church.)

_____. The Ryrie Study Bible. Chicago: Moody Press, 1978.

_____. "What Is Spirituality?" Bibliotheca Sacra 126:503 (July-September 1969):204-13.

_____. You Mean the Bible Teaches That . . .. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

_____. "Sinners' Who Are Forgiven or Saints' Who Sin?" Biblitheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):400-12.

Savage, Paula A. "Greek Women's Dress." Biblical Illustrator 12:2 (Winter 1986):17-23.

Scanzoni, Letha and Hardesty, Nancy. All We're Meant to Be. Waco: Word Books, 1975.

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. 8 vols. 1910. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1966.

Sellers, C. Norman. Biblical Conclusions Concerning Tongues. Miami: By the author, n.d.

Simon, W. G. H. The First Epistle to the Corinthians: Introduction and Commentary. London: SCM, 1959.

Smith, Jay E. "Can Fallen Leaders Be Restored to Leadership? Bibliotheca Sacra 151:604 (October-December 1994):455-80.

Smith, Wilbur. "Inheritance and Reward in Heaven." Eternity, March 1977, p. 79.

Smith, William Robertson. Lectures on the Religion of the Semites. 3rd ed. New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1969.

Stanton, Gerald B. Kept from the Hour. Fourth ed. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1991.

Sweeting, George. Love Is the Greatest. 1968; revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Terry, Milton S. Biblical Hermeneutics. Second ed. Reprinted. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1964.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Edited by Gerhard Kittel. S.v. "erchomai," by Johannes Schneider.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, Robert L. "1 Cor 13:11 Revisited: an Exegetical Update." Master's Seminary Journal 4:2 (Fall 1993):187-201.

_____. "Tongues . . . Will Cease'." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 17:2 (Spring 1974):81-89.

_____. "Prophecy Rediscovered? A Review of The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 149:593 (January-March 1992):83-96.

_____. Understanding Spiritual Gifts: An exegetical study of 1 Corinthians 12-14. Chicago: Moody Press, 1978.

Thrall, M. E. The First and Second Letters of Paul to the Corinthians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965.

Toussaint, Stanley D. "First Corinthians Thirteen and The Tongues Question," Bibliotheca Sacra 120:480 (October-December 1963):311-16.

_____. "The Spiritual Man." Bibliotheca Sacra 125:498 (April-June 1968):139-46.

Ukleja, P. Michael. "Homosexuality in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:560 (October-December 1983):350-58.

Unger, Merrill F. New Testament Teaching on Tongues. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1971.

Vine, W. E. 1 Corinthians. London: Oliphants, 1951.

von Campenhausen, H. Ecclesiastical Authority and Spiritual Power in the Church of the First Three Centuries. Stanford: Stanford University, 1969.

Wall, Joe L. Going for the Gold. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Waltke, Bruce K. "1 Corinthians 11:2-16: An Interpretation." Bibliotheca Sacra 135:537 (January-March 1978):46-57.

Walvoord, John F. The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976.

_____. "Contemporary Issues in the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Part IV: Spiritual Gifts Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 130:520 (October-December 1973):315-28. Reprinted as "The Holy Spirit and Spiritual Gifts." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:570 (April-June 1986):109-21.

_____. The Holy Spirit. 1954. Findlay, Oh.: Dunham Publishing Co., 1958.

_____. The Rapture Question. Findlay, Oh: Dunham Publishing Co., 1957.

White, Joel R. "Baptized on Account of the Dead": The Meaning of 1 Corinthians 15:29 in its Context." Journal of Biblical Literature 116:3 (1997):487-99.

White, R. Fowler. "Does God Speak Today Apart from the Bible? In The Coming Evangelical Crisis, pp. 77-90. Edited by John H. Armstrong. Chicago: Moody Press, 1996.

Wilkin, Robert N. "Are All Things Lawful for Believers?" Grace Evangelical Society Newsletter 4:7 (July 1989):2.

_____. "The So-Called So-Called Brother." Grace Evangelical Society News 6:10 (October 1991):2-3.

Wilson, Kenneth T. "Should Women Wear Headcoverings?" Bibliotheca Sacra 148:592 (October-December 1991):442-62.

Yamauchi, Edwin M. "Cultural Aspects of Marriage in the Ancient World." Bibliotheca Sacra 135:539 (July-September 1978):241-52.

Zuck, Roy B. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

THE FIRST

EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL, THE APOSTLE,

TO THE CORINTHIANS.

INTRODUCTION.

Corinth was the capital of Achaia, a very rich and populous city, where St. Paul had preached a year and a half, and converted a great many. See Acts xviii. 10. Now having received a letter from them, (chap. vii. 1.) and being informed of divers disputes and divisions among them, (chap. i. ver. 11.) he wrote this letter to them, and sent it by the same persons, Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, who had brought him their letter, chap. xvi. 17. It was written about the year 56, not from Philippi, as it is commonly marked at the end of the Greek copies, but rather from Ephesus. The subject and main design of this Epistle was to take away the divisions among them about the talents and merits of those who had baptized and preached to them, and to settle divers matters of ecclesiastical discipline. The apostle justifieth his mission, and his manner of preaching, chap. i, ii, iii, and iv. He teacheth them what was to be done with the man guilty of a scandalous sin of incest, chap. v. He speaks of sins against chastity; of matrimony; and of the state of continency, chap. vi and vii. Of meats offered to idols, chap. viii. Of his manner of conversing with them, and what their conversation ought to be, chap. ix and x. Of the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, chap. xi. Of the different gifts of the Holy Ghost, and how to employ them, chap. xii, xiii, and xiv. Of the faith of the resurrection, chap. xv. Of charitable contributions, and of his design of coming again to them, chap. xvi. (Witham) --- St. Paul having planted the faith in Corinth, where he had preached a year and a half, and converted a great many, went to Ephesus. After being there three years, he wrote this first Epistle to the Corinthians, and sent it by the same persons, Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus, who had brought their letter to him. It was written about twenty-four years after our Lord's ascension, and contains several matters appertaining to faith and morals, and also to ecclesiastical discipline. (Challoner)

====================

Gill: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 CORINTHIANS

This was not the first epistle that was written by the apostle to the Corinthians, for we read in this of his having written an epistle to them before, 1Co 5:9, but this is the first epistle of his unto them, that is now extant; and has been received by the churches, as of divine authority, being written by the inspiration of God, of which there has been no doubt in any age. The apostle himself was nearly two years at Corinth; where he preached with great success; and was the instrument of converting many persons, who by him were formed into a church state, consisting both of Jews and Gentiles, as is clear from many passages in this epistle, and whom be left in good order, and in great peace and harmony; but quickly after his departure, false teachers got in among them, and bad principles were imbibed by many of them, and evil practices prevailed among them, and they fell into factions and parties, which occasioned the apostle to write this epistle to them, as well as their writing to him concerning certain things, they desired to have his judgment and opinion of, 1Co 7:1, It is thought to be written about the year of Christ 55, and in the first year of Nero, though some place it in the year 59. It was written not from Philippi, as the subscription added to it affirms, but from Ephesus, as appears from 1Co 16:8, and, it may be, after the uproar raised there by Demetrius, as should seem from a passage in 1Co 15:32. The matter of it is various. The apostle first rebukes them for their schisms and divisions; suggests that their regard to the wisdom of men, and the philosophy of the Gentiles, had brought the simplicity of the Gospel into contempt with them; blames them for their conduct in the case of the incestuous person, and urges them to put him away from them; reproves them for going to law with one another before Heathen magistrates, and warmly inveighs against fornication; and then answers several questions, and resolves several cases concerning marriage; treats of things offered to idols, and of the maintenance of ministers; and dissuades from idolatry, and all appearance of it; takes notice of the unbecoming conduct of the members of the church at the Lord's supper; and discourses concerning the nature and use of spiritual gifts, and commends charity above them; observes and corrects some irregularities in the use of their gifts; proves by various arguments the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, which some of them denied; exhorts to a collection for the poor saints, and to several other things, and concludes the epistle with the salutations of others, and of himself.

Gill: 1 Corinthians 9 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 CORINTHIANS 9

The principal things in this chapter are the proof of the apostle's office and authority; arguments for his own maintenance, and the maintenance of Gospel ministers; reasons why he did not make use of his right and privilege in this respect: and the whole is concluded with an exhortation to diligence and perseverance in the Christian course of life, of which he himself was an example. He begins with his office, as an apostle, and proves it; partly by his independency on men, not having his call and mission from them; and partly by his corporeal sight of Christ, and the authority which he in person received from him; and also by the success of his ministry among the Corinthians, 1Co 9:1, wherefore, whatever might be objected to him by other persons, they had no reason to object to his apostleship, seeing they, being converted under his ministry, were so many seals of it, 1Co 9:2, and since his call to the ministry was firm and valid, he had a right, as other ministers, to a maintenance of himself and family, should he have any, from the churches, without labouring with his own hands, 1Co 9:3, which he proves from the law of nature and nations, exemplified in the cases of soldiers, planters of vineyards, and keepers of flocks, who by virtue of their calling and service have a right to a livelihood, between whom, and ministers of the Gospel, there is some resemblance, 1Co 9:7, and also from the law of Moses, particularly the law respecting the ox, which was not to be muzzled when it tread out the corn; and which he observes is to be understood, not only and barely in the letter of oxen, but of ministers of the word, who are as husbandmen that plough and thresh in hope, and therefore should be partakers of their hope, 1Co 9:8. Moreover, the apostle argues the right of the maintenance of the ministers of the Gospel, from the justice and equity of the thing, that seeing they minister spiritual things, it is but reasonable that they should receive temporal ones, 1Co 9:11, and which the apostle argues for himself, and Barnabas, as from the instances of other apostles, 1Co 9:5, so from the examples of those that succeeded him in Corinth, who were maintained by that church; though he did not think fit, when among them, to claim his right, and make use of his power, lest any check should be put to the progress of the Gospel, 1Co 9:12. And he goes on to make this point clear and manifest from the case of, the priests and Levites under the former dispensation, who ministering in holy things, had a provision made for them, 1Co 9:13. And lastly, from the constitution and appointment of Christ himself, who has ordained it as a law of his, that the preachers of the Gospel should live of it, 1Co 9:14, though the apostle himself did not make use of this his privilege; nor would he ever make use of it, especially at Corinth, for which he gives his reasons; and his principal one was, that his glorying might not be made void, 1Co 9:15 which did not lie in preaching the Gospel, for that he was obliged to do, 1Co 9:16, for if he had engaged in it of his own accord, he would have had his reward; but since it was through necessity, he could not claim any, 1Co 9:17, or if any, it could be no other than to preach the Gospel "gratis", and without charge, which was the thing he gloried in, 1Co 9:18, and thus, though he lived independent of men, both with respect to his office and his maintenance, yet in order to gain souls to Christ, and be the instrument of their salvation, he became a servant to all, 1Co 9:19, who are distributed into three sorts, the Jews that were under the law, 1Co 9:20, the Gentiles that were without the law, 1Co 9:21, and weak Christians, 1Co 9:22, all which he did, not with any lucrative view to himself, but for the sake of the Gospel, that he might partake of that, and of the glory he was called unto by it, 1Co 9:23 which, and not temporal things, he was looking unto, and pressing after; and which he illustrates by a metaphor taken from the Grecian games, well known to the Corinthians, particularly that of running races, in which all ran, but one only had the prize: wherefore he exhorts the Corinthians to run in like manner, that they may obtain the prize which he mentions, and describes as an incorruptible crown, in opposition to a corruptible one, which others strove for, 1Co 9:24, and to this he animates by his own example and conduct, which he expresses in terms borrowed from racers and wrestlers, expressive of his humility, sobriety, and temperance; which things he exercised, that whilst he was a preacher to others, he might not be worthy of reproof and disapprobation himself, 1Co 9:26.

College: 1 Corinthians (Book Introduction)

FOREWORD

Since the past few decades have seen an explosion in the number of books, articles, and commentaries on First Corinthians, a brief word to the readers might help them know what to expect or not to expect from this commentary. This commentary is intended for use by studious lay people, Bible teachers, and seminary students. Most scholars and specialists in the area of New Testament will probably find this commentary's treatment of 1 Corinthians and its problems too elementary. Because of the intended audience for this work and the constraints of length, the user should be aware of certain acknowledged limitations. There are at least four of these:

1. This commentary does not pretend to look at every problem, real or imaginary, which has caught the eye of previous scholarship.

2. The commentary does not attempt to cite continuously the interpretations of leading Christian thinkers as they have written on this Pauline letter.

3. Interpretations are given on individual passages without always citing the full evidence and without working through the attendant arguments, either for or against particular views.

4. Only a moderate number of footnotes have been used. In addition, the vast majority of the secondary literature cited will be English language and will, when possible, be in book form. The nonspecialist for whom this commentary is intended has little interest in or access to technical materials, journal literature, or foreign language materials.

Those who wish to study this letter of Paul in more detail should look to some of the more technical commentaries (e.g., Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians ).

I owe a special word of thanks to two individuals. My friend Gail Brady graciously typed the entire manuscript of this commentary for me. My friend and colleague Prof. Allen Black read the entire manuscript for me and saved me and my readers from more than one instance of an inappropriate choice of words as well as an occasional overstatement.

I dedicate this volume to my parents who shared with me over the years their own faith, hope, and love.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

INTRODUCTION

METHODOLOGY

The text of Scripture known as 1 Corinthians has provided a well from which believers have drunk for almost two millennia. This portion of Scripture has served the church as a resource for theology, for homiletical exposition, for pastoral issues, and more recently as a source for reconstructing social dimensions and dynamics of early Pauline Christianity. Whatever else one wants to say about 1 Corinthians, it cannot be doubted that it has had a significant impact on the Christian church.

Notwithstanding the necessity and value of this diversity of perspectives and interpretive methodologies which have come across the stage of Christian history, this present work is more narrowly focused in its approach. This work is primarily a historical-exegetical commentary, the goal of which is to understand and set forth the ideas, doctrines, and feelings Paul communicated in the letter of 1 Corinthians. The phrase "ideas, doctrines, and feelings" is not intended to describe an "intellectual history" of the great Apostle. Rather, Paul's ideas, doctrines, and feelings, as recorded in 1 Corinthians, are engendered and evoked by a series of practices and beliefs, diverse in themselves, coming from individuals and groups in the church of God at Corinth.

A decision to write a historical-exegetical commentary brings with it several assumptions and commitments.

1. This means in the first instance that the feelings, doctrines, and ideas of Paul must, as far as possible, be understood in the historical framework, both in which he wrote them and in which the first readers lived. A historical-exegetical approach has little in common with simplistic attempts to modernize Paul, to re-create him after the image of western Christianity. To be sure, every practicing believer knows firsthand the need to bring forward, with God's help and wisdom, the meaning of the ancient text into the modern world. How strange it appears, however, when those who wish to contextualize the Gospel in the modern setting have not invested the time and effort to first learn what it meant in its original context. Just as a good translation of Russian literature into French requires that one be familiar with both languages, so a good translation of the ideas of Paul's letter to the Corinthians into modern idiom requires a competent grasp of the original meaning of this letter as well as the modern world.

2. A commitment to a historical-exegetical methodology means that one must always recognize that Paul's letter to the Corinthians is an occasional document, arising in the first instance as direct responses to ad hoc issues and problems in the lives of believers living in a certain region of the Roman Empire, at a specific time, and under particular historical and cultural circumstances. Since the historical method infers that Paul's commands, arguments, and instructions were given in direct response to the issues raised by the lives and ideas of the Corinthians, one must openly acknowledge that 1 Corinthians may not address every issue that we, living two millennia later, hope it would. In fact, 1 Corinthians was not even adequate or appropriate for addressing the problem in all the Pauline churches. I am certain, for example, that the churches of Galatia would have been perplexed to receive 1 Corinthians as a solution to their specific problems. Indeed, even at Corinth it had to be supplemented by 2 Corinthians.

Not only does the historical method help restrain us from foisting our own agendas and ecclesiastical problems upon that small group of believers who lived at a particular time in Roman Achaia almost 2000 years ago, it also serves as a restraint for those who would twist the Scriptures and put forth their own ideology masquerading as exegesis. Time and again commentators have found a theology or doctrinal imprimatur in the text of 1 Corinthians which, even if generally true, has little in common with Paul's own intention and goals for this letter. Throughout the centuries preachers and theologians have strolled through the cafeteria of 1 Corinthians, appetite whetted, looking for some word, idea, or verse to place upon the plate from which they feed the church. At some point this kind of pragmatism in handling Scripture, which is driven by a variety of appetites, must be labeled as malpractice, and the student of Scripture needs to obey again the pastoral admonition to become "a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth" (2 Tim 2:15).

Even though a historical-exegetical method is the underpinning of this commentary, it is in no way the final task for the church in the interpretation of 1 Corinthians. Rather, the historical-exegetical approach should be the first step, and a necessary one, which is followed by many other steps taken by believers who, through the course of their journey, translate the manifold and variegated message of 1 Corinthians for the contemporary and global church of Jesus Christ. The individual tools and methods used in this process of contextualization would hopefully come from the guidance of God as well as study in the traditional theological disciplines of homiletics, systematic theology, pastoral theology, ethnotheology, and the like.

THE LETTER OF 1 CORINTHIANS

DESTINATION

The letter of 1 Corinthians was sent by Paul and Sosthenes to the congregation of believers in the city of Corinth. This is in contrast to 2 Corinthians, which was written not only to believers in Corinth but also to believers in the province of Achaia, of which Corinth was the capital (2 Cor 1:1). The content of 1 Cor 5:9 "I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people" makes it evident that the letter of 1 Corinthians is not Paul's first written communication with the church at Corinth since he here refers to a previous letter he had already sent them and which they apparently misunderstood (5:9-11).

DATE

Even though the Acts of the Apostles was not written for the purpose of providing a historical framework for the Pauline Corpus, there are instances where Acts and facts from ancient historical records do supplement the letters of Paul. One very important way in which Acts supplements the less specific material in the Pauline letters is in regard to chronology. Without the chronological framework of Acts, it would be much harder to know how to arrange in sequence materials from Paul's letters and to assign dates to them. It is our good fortune to be able to assign dates to about five episodes mentioned in Acts, and thereby, assign relative dates to parts of Paul's correspondence. One of these instances is the case of Acts 18 where Luke narrates the beginning of the Pauline mission in Corinth. At that point we have firm evidence for the date of the Christian mission based upon supplemental historical data. In particular, Acts indicates that Paul's work at Corinth took place while Gallio was the proconsul of Achaia (Acts 18:12). This Roman official, who was the brother of the Roman philosopher Seneca, is known from ancient Roman literature as well as archaeological data. It is this latter realm of evidence which helps specify the time of his career when he was proconsul in Corinth. This would put Paul's work at Corinth and his appearance before Gallio in the early 50s. Acts 18:11 indicates that Paul worked in Corinth for 18 months; this means that Paul's correspondence in 1 Corinthians would have occurred in approximately A.D. 55. While some interpreters have attempted to get even more precise with the dating, it seems that A.D. 55 is as specific as the evidence can support.

PROVENANCE

Paul was actually not far from Corinth when he wrote 1 Corinthians. First Corinthians 16:8 points decisively to a site on the eastern side of the Aegean Sea, in Ephesus, on the western coast of the Roman province of Asia. Travel between large port cities such as Corinth and Ephesus was frequent and relatively easy in the Roman world. Consequently, it is no surprise to find Corinthians visiting Paul, and Paul and his co-workers making visits from Asia to Corinth.

ROMAN CORINTH

The Greek city of Corinth had suffered defeat at the hands of the expanding Roman Republic in 146 B.C. The archaeological evidence does not support, however, the idea that in the ensuing years all life and Greek influence vanished from this conquered and partially desolate site. While the Greek Corinth was clearly defeated, it was not totally deserted in the decades following 146 B.C. When Julius Caesar, shortly before his assassination in 44 B.C., reestablished the city as a Roman colony, it would have quickly become a city which was dominantly, but not exclusively, Roman. Consequently, any study of Paul's letter to the church of God at Corinth must take seriously the fact that Paul was addressing a city which had been, since 44 B.C., a Roman colony ( Colonia Laus Iulia Corinthiensis ). Roman colonies were typically established as outposts for promoting Roman culture, religion, language, and political systems as well as providing lands for retired Roman soldiers. And even though Corinth was located geographically in Greece, there is no doubt that Roman mores and ideas impacted the local populace since, as Aulus Gellius noted (2nd cent. A.D.), Roman colonies "seemed to be miniatures, as it were, and in a way copies" of the Roman people. Therefore, Corinth possessed all the appropriate Roman laws, magistrates and officials.

Because of Corinth's mercantile character and important geographical location, it quickly attracted new residents from throughout the eastern Mediterranean. Consequently, by the time of Paul's arrival in Corinth, almost one century after its reestablishment as a city, the population would have included not only Romans, but also Greeks, Jews, Egyptians, Syrians, etc.

ORIGIN, STRUCTURE AND CONTENT OF 1 CORINTHIANS

Even though there is not a consensus among interpreters regarding the exact nature and causes of the problems which Paul treats in 1 Corinthians, there is general agreement that the letter is organized around the cluster of problems which Paul is striving to remedy by his apostolic instruction. The letter is basically a series of smaller units of thought, each of which seems to be directed to a particular aberration in the beliefs and/or practices of the Corinthians. Paul's style in the letter is to acknowledge the existence of a sin or problem, address the sin or problem, and then move on to the next one.

Paul's information about these various problems at Corinth did not come from firsthand knowledge of his own nor through inspiration. The majority, if not all, of Paul's information about the various issues with which he dealt in the letter came most likely from two distinct human sources. The information and problems treated in 1 Cor 1-6 came from those from the house of Chloe. First Corinthians 1:11 states that "some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you," thereby identifying Paul's source of information for the problem he treats in 1 Cor 1-4. The wording of 1 Cor 5:1 "It is actually reported" points probably to additional information in 1 Cor 5-6 which was also supplied by those from Chloe's house. If this is not the case, then we have no idea who provided this report of immorality among the Corinthians.

A second major source for Paul's information is mentioned in 1 Cor 7:1 when he wrote, " Now for the matters you wrote about ." Paul is expressly acknowledging here that the list of issues and problems that he is going to respond to came from a document authored and sent by Corinthian believers to him. Numerous modern interpreters believe, rightly so in my opinion, that this Corinthian document informed Paul not only about the issue discussed in 1 Cor 7:1ff, but also the matters discussed at 8:1ff ( Now about food sacrificed to idols), 12:1ff ( Now about spiritual gifts), and 16:1ff ( Now about the collection for God's people).

At least two points can be drawn from this information. The first is that the Corinthians themselves should receive credit for the broad outline of what was discussed and treated in 1 Corinthians. In addition, one ought not overlook the fact that Paul's treatment of the Corinthians' problems is a treatment of the problems as communicated to him through an unnamed informant of one of the women members of the congregation and through a letter (authors unknown) sent to Paul which already had, regardless of its tone, an agenda for which Paul was not responsible. It is obvious, then, that even though no one seriously doubts the Pauline authorship of 1 Corinthians, it is important for the interpreter to appreciate the complex role of the Corinthians in their contribution to the content and structure of the epistle.

PROBLEMS AT CORINTH

The task of identifying and reconstructing the multiple problems within the church of God at Corinth on the basis of Paul's letter to them is not a simple one. Writing decades ago on this very problem Prof. Kirsopp Lake commented,

The difficulty which undoubtedly attends any attempt to understand the Epistles of St. Paul is largely due to the fact that they are letters; for the writer of letters assumes the knowledge of a whole series of facts, which are, as he is quite aware, equally familiar to his correspondent and to himself. But as time goes on this knowledge is gradually forgotten and what was originally quite plain becomes difficult and obscure; it has to be recovered from stray hints and from other documents by a process of laborious research, before it is possible for the letters to be read with anything approaching to the ease and intelligence possessed by those to whom they were originally sent.

There are some scholars who wish to interpret most, if not all, of the problems in 1 Corinthians as arising from one group of individuals at Corinth. The evidence of 1 Corinthians does not, in my judgment, support such a theory. There are, admittedly, aspects of this approach which are attractive. Common traits, to be sure, can be found among some of the problems. For example, Paul refers to the sin of boasting as an ingredient in more than one of the problems within the Corinthians fellowship. Likewise, the terms "division" ( , schisma ) (1 Cor 1:10; 11:18) and "dissension" (also schisma ) (1 Cor 12:25) are used by Paul in describing more than one problem situation among the letter's recipients. This common denominator of schisma does not require the conclusion that the problems of "party loyalty" in 1 Cor 1-4, abuse of the Lord's Meal in 11:17-22, and misunderstanding and misuse of spiritual gifts in 12-14 must all be traced back to a common theological aberration, to the same social stratum in the church, or to a particular house church in Corinth.

Since the goal in this commentary is to interpret 1 Corinthians as Paul's coherent letter, we must respect Paul's own categorization of the issues at Corinth if we want to understand the intent of his instruction and flow of thought as he responded and gave directions to the church of God at Corinth. If direct and explicit social links between the organizational subunits within 1 Corinthians can be isolated, so much the better for exegesis. However, to this point in time many of the rhetorical, sociological and anthropological reconstructions of the Christian community(ies) at Corinth resemble, at times, a Procrustean Bed rather than a picture put together on the basis of an exegetical-historical model.

Throughout the modern period of Pauline interpretation scholars have regularly commented on the issue of Paul's opponents at Corinth. In this interpretive context, the term opponent has become almost synonymous with those who promoted or participated in the spiritual aberrations opposed by Paul in 1 Corinthians. More recently, however, other scholars have rightly attempted to both refine and redefine the term opponent. From this ongoing discussion two points are relevant to this study of 1 Corinthians. First, one must not automatically equate the personalities, groups and aberrations behind 2 Corinthians with those behind 1 Corinthians. There is no compelling reason to believe that the two letters were written to address the exact same problems. In fact, the internal evidence leads away from such a position. (1) 1 Corinthians was written only to the church in Corinth, while 2 Corinthians was written not only to the church in Corinth but also to all believers in all the Roman province of Achaia, of which Corinth was the capital. (2) Most of the key terms and ideas of each letter are not found in the other. (3) The tenor and literary characteristics of each letter are distinctive.

The second observation from the contemporary discussion of Pauline opponents is the question of whether every spiritual aberration within a Pauline church should be interpreted as intentional and direct opposition to Paul himself. It is not a question of whether Paul ever had opponents (e.g., 2 Corinthians, Galatians), but whether the term opponent is the appropriate term for everyone who was guilty of spiritual perceptions and doctrines different than Paul's or whose lifestyle was not in harmony with Paul's ethical teachings. John Calvin touched on this point in his commentary on 1 Corinthians when he wrote, "Now, I have good reason for thinking that those worthless fellows, who had caused trouble in the Corinthian church, were not open enemies of the truth." Calvin's point is well taken and his caution in using the term opponent will be followed in this work. More explicit and extended discussions on the topic of opponents will be found at the appropriate junctures in the commentary itself.

OUTLINE OF 1 CORINTHIANS

The recognition of literary units in 1 Corinthians is part and parcel of the task of exegesis. The opening and closing of units of thought are not merely arbitrary literary embellishments nor are they just convenient ways to structure Paul's thought and feelings. These units put linguistic and semantic limits on the words and thoughts of Paul. The recognition of these demarcations in 1 Corinthians is mandated, since it helps ensure that the flow of Paul's rhetorical argument remains within the limits set by the Apostle himself. Moreover, a respect for the conceptual units and subunits of Paul's letter will greatly reduce the tendency to make his words mean more than he intended them to mean. This tendency to generalize Paul's thought and words beyond the immediate rhetorical setting comes at a high price, since it can only be maintained by denying the occasional nature of the Pauline correspondence as well as the universally recognized fact that meaning emerges from rhetorical and contextual usage.

Introduction etc. 1:1-9

Issue 1 Disunity and Community Fragmentation 1:10-4:20

Issue 2 Reports of Immorality 5:1-6:20

Issue 3 Sexuality/Celibacy/Marriage 7:1-40

Issue 4 Foods Offered to Idols 8:1-11:1

Issue 5 Liturgical Aberrations 11:2-34

Issue 6 Misunderstanding of Spiritual Gifts 12:1-14:40

Issue 7 Misunderstanding of Believers' Resurrection 15:1-58

Issue 8 Instruction for the Collection 16:1-11

Concluding topics 16:12-24

HISTORICAL MATRIX FOR THE CORINTHIAN PROBLEMS

Without going into the multifaceted issues about the historical evidence from Acts for Paul's churches and how this relates to the evidence for Paul and his churches from his own letters, it seems prudent to rely initially and primarily upon the evidence of 1 Corinthians itself rather than Luke's material in Acts to understand the nature and extent of the problems in the church at Corinth. To be specific, one must not falsely conclude, on the basis of the Lukan picture of a predominant Jewish matrix of the church in Corinth, that Jewish beliefs and practices provide the matrix for most of the aberrations within the Corinthian church. In this regard, Gordon Fee is correct when he points out that many of the problems at Corinth are explicitly traced by Paul to the converts' pagan heritage. It can be argued, furthermore, that even those issues not explicitly traced to pagan heritage by Paul can be best understood by seeing them against the backdrop of Greco-Roman rather than Jewish mores and values.

The issues depicted in 1 Corinthians arose directly from the lives of that first generation Christian community, most of whom had been believers no more than 48 months. Since Paul nowhere implies in 1 Corinthians that the Corinthian problems were introduced by outsiders, the most reasonable course to follow in evaluating the origin of the Corinthian issues is to investigate the urban setting of Roman Corinth from which the converts came. This means that the religious and cultural perspectives which shaped the beliefs and practices of those whom Paul addressed in this letter provide the best circumstantial evidence and clues for the interpretation of 1 Corinthians.

While the need to recognize the Greco-Roman matrix of the Corinthian problems might seem self-evident, the history of the interpretation of 1 Corinthians clearly reveals that not all interpreters have shared this methodological concern. In practice this approach to 1 Corinthians means that:

1. One must not attribute the Jewishness of Paul and the Scriptural basis of his own theology to those recent converts whom he was correcting. To extract texts and vocabulary from Jewish sources (e.g., Mishnah, Dead Sea Scrolls, Gospels, etc.) to understand the matrix of the Corinthians' problems is highly suspect. The fact that Paul often cites Scripture to remedy the problems at Corinth speaks more of his own Jewish heritage, his apostolic ministry, and his convictions that all Christians are to be guided by Scripture than it does that there was some significant Jewish background to the Corinthian problems.

2. The mores, patterns of culture and specific religious institutions of Greco-Roman paganism must be seen as the soil in which the Corinthian problems were germinated and grew.

3. The specific condition of the Corinth of Paul's day should be taken as the immediate setting for the converts. One must exercise caution in using information about an earlier Greek Corinth which had been destroyed in the second century B.C. and no longer existed in Paul's day in order to describe the Corinth of Paul's day.

4. One must recognize the multicultural nature of Corinth at Paul's time. It was geographically Greek, it was administratively and politically Roman, and its denizens came from throughout the central and eastern parts of the Mediterranean Basin. Consequently, one must reckon with ethnic influences in Paul's Corinth which reflect Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Syrian, Jewish, and Anatolian influences.

5. Vague and anachronistic labels such as gnosticism should be avoided until appropriate historical evidence and documentation can be discovered and shown to be relevant to the issues at Corinth addressed by Paul. A commitment to the notion of a gnostic background to 1 Corinthians still has advocates, though their numbers are surely down from that of the 19th and earlier part of the 20th century. Quite recently, for example, Pheme Perkins argued that

. . . gnostic mythologizing does form part of the horizon within which the New Testament should be interpreted. Students of Christian origins have become accustomed to comparing the New Testament material with a wide variety of Jewish and Greco-Roman sources. The same efforts of analysis and comparison should be applied to the gnostic material.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alexander, L.C.A. "Chronology of Paul." In Dictionary of Paul and His Letters . Ed. G.F. Hawthorne et al. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993, pp. 115-123.

Aune, David E. The New Testament in Its Literary Environment . Library of Early Christianity. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987.

________________ . Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983.

Banks, R. "Church Order and Government." DPL , pp. 131-137.

Barnett, P.W. "Apostle." DPL, pp. 45-51.

________________ . "Opponents of Paul." DPL , pp. 644-653.

________________ . "Revolutionary Movements." DPL , pp. 812-819.

________________ . "Tentmaking." DPL , pp. 925-927.

Barrett, C.K. The First Epistle to the Corinthians . New York: Harper, 1968.

Beasley-Murray, G.R. "Baptism." DPL , pp. 60-66.

Beker, J.C. Paul the Apostle. The Triumph of God in Life and Thought. Phliadelphia: Fortress, 1980 .

Belleville, L.L. "Moses." DPL , pp. 620-21.

Black, M. "1 Cor. 11:2-16-A Re-investigation." Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity , Vol. 1. Ed. Carroll D. Osburn. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Co., 1993, pp. 191-218.

Blomberg, Craig L. The Historical Reliability of the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1987 .

Blue, B.B. "Food Offered to Idols and Jewish Food Laws." DPL , pp. 306-310.

________________ . "Apollos." DPL , pp. 37-39.

Bruce, F.F. 1 and 2 Corinthians. London: Butler & Tanner Ltd., 1971.

Bultmann, Rudolf. Theology of the New Testament . 2 vols. Trans. by K. Grobel. New York: Charles Scribners, 1951, 1955.

Calvin, John. The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians. Calvin's New Testament Commentaries. Trans. J.W. Fraser, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960.

Cantarella, Eva. Pandora's Daughters. The Role and Status of Women in Greek and Roman Antiquity . Trans. M.B. Fant; Foreword by M.R. Lefkowitz. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1987.

Carson, D.A. Showing the Spirit. A Theological Exposition of I Corinthians 12-14 . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987.

Carson, D.A., Douglas Moo, and Leon Morris. Introduction to the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Casson, Lionel. Travel in the Ancient World . Toronto: Hakkert, 1974.

Chamblin, J.K. "Freedom/Liberty." DPL , pp. 313-316.

Chrysostom, Dio. The Eighth Discourse, on Virtue , 9-10. Vol. 1. Trans. by J.W. Cohoon. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1949.

Clarke, Andrew D. Secular & Christian Leadership in Corinth. A Socio-Historical & Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 1-6 , Vol. 18. Arbeiten zur Geshichte des Antiken Judentums & des Urchristentums. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1993.

Comfort, P.W. "Idolatry." DPL , pp. 424-426.

Conzelmann, Hans. I Corinthians . Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.

Cottrell, Jack . Feminism and the Bible: An Introduction to Feminism for Christians. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Co.,1992.

________________ . Gender Roles and the Bible: Creation, the Fall, and Redemption. Joplin, MO: College Press Publishing Co.,1994.

de Lacey, D.R. "Holy Days." DPL , pp. 402-404.

Donfried, Karl. "Chronology: New Testament." In Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 1. Ed. D.N. Freedman, et al. New York: Doubleday, 1992-1994, pp. 1011 & 1022.

Dover, K.J. "Classical Greek Attitudes to Sexual Behaviour." In Women in the Ancient World. The Arethusa Papers . Ed. John Peradotto and J.P. Sullivan. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1984.

Ellis, E.E. "Coworkers, Paul and His." DPL , pp. 183-189.

Engels, Donald. Roman Corinth: An Alternative Model for the Classical City . Chicago: The University of Chicago, 1990.

Everts, J.M. "Conversion and Call of Paul." DPL , pp. 156-160.

________________ . "Financial Support." DPL , pp. 295-300.

Fee, Gordon. First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987 .

________________ . God's Empowering Presence. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994 .

________________ . "Gifts of the Spirit." DPL , pp. 339-347.

________________ . New Testament Exegesis . Rev. ed. Louisville: Westminster Press, 1993.

Ferguson, E. Demonology of the Early Christian World . Lewiston, NY: E. Mellin Press, 1984.

________________ . Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993 .

Fitzmyer, J. "A Feature of Qumran Angelology and the Angels of 1 Cor. xi.10." New Testament Studies 4 (1957-1958): 48-58.

________________ . "Another Look at KEFALH in 1 Cor. 11.3." NTS 35 (1989): 503-511.

________________ . Paul and His Theology. A Brief Sketch . 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1989.

Fuller, R.M. "Rewards." DPL , pp. 819-820.

Fung, R.Y.K. "Body of Christ." DPL , pp. 76-82.

________________ . "Cursing, Accursed, Anathema." DPL , pp. 199-200.

Furnish, Victor P. "Corinth in Paul's Time - What Can Archaeology Tell Us?" Biblical Archaeology Review 15 (1988): 16-17.

________________ . II Corinthians . Anchor Bible. Vol. 32A. New York: Doubleday, 1984.

________________ . "Theology in First Corinthians." In Pauline Theology . Vol. II: 1 & 2 Corinthians. Ed. David M. Hay. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991 .

Gellius, Aulus. Noctes Atticae 16.13.9. The Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius . Vol. 3. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1961.

Gill, D.W.J. "The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-Coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16." Tyndale Bulletin 41 (1990): 245-260 .

Gillespie, Thomas W. The First Theologians. A Study in Early Christian Prophecy . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.

Green, J.B. "Death of Christ." DPL , pp. 201-209.

Green, Michael. I Believe in the Holy Spirit . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Guthrie, Donald and Ralph Martin. "God." DPL , pp. 354-369.

Gundry-Volf, Judith M. "Apostasy, Falling Away, Perseverance." DPL , pp. 42-43.

Haacker, Klaus. "Gallio." In ABD. Vol. 2, pp. 901-903.

Hafemann, S.J. "Corinthians, Letters to." DPL , pp. 164-179.

Hansen, G.W. "Rhetorical Criticism." DPL , pp. 822-826.

Hengel, Martin. Crucifixion in the Ancient World. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977 .

Hock, Ronald F. The Social Context of Paul's Ministry. Tentmaking and Apostleship. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.

Hodge, Charles. An Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965.

Holladay, Carl. First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians. Living Word Commentaries . Vol. 8. Austin, TX: Sweet Publishing Company, 1979 .

Hooker, M.D. "Authority on Her Head: An Examination of 1 Cor. XI.10." New Testament Studies. Vol 10 (1963-1964): 410-416.

Horsley, G.H.R. "Invitation to the Kline of Sarapis." New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity. Vol.1, 1981, pp. 5-9.

Hurd, John C. The Origin of 1 Corinthians. New York: Seabury Press, 1965.

Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary. New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993.

Kent, John H. Corinth . Vol. VIII, Pt. III. The Inscriptions 1926-1950. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1966.

Kim, S. "Jesus, Sayings of." DPL , pp. 474-492.

Kistemaker, Simon. Exposition of the First Epistle to the Corinthians . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993.

Klein, W.M., C.L. Blomberg, and R.L. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation . Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

Kraemer, Ross S. "Non-literary Evidence for Jewish Women in Rome and Egypt." In Rescuing Creusa. New Methodological Approaches to Women in Antiquity . Ed. M. Skinner. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University Press, 1987.

Kümmel, W.G. Introduction to the New Testament . Rev. ed. Trans. H.C. Kee. Nashville: Abingdon, 1975.

Lake, Kirsopp. The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul: Their Motive and Origin , p. vii. Cited by John C. Hurd, The Origin of 1 Corinthians . New York: Seabury Press, 1965.

Luter, A. B., Jr. "Grace." DPL , pp. 372-374.

MacMullen, Ramsay. Paganism in the Roman Empire . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981.

McKnight, S. "Collection for the Saints." DPL , pp. 143-147.

McRay, John. Archaeology and the New Testament . Grand Rapids: Baker, 1991.

Malherbe, A.J. Moral Exhortation, A Greco-Roman Sourcebook . Ed. W.A. Meeks. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986.

Malick, D.E. "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in Romans 1:26-27." Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (1993) 327-340.

________________ . "The Condemnation of Homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6:9." Bibliotheca Sacra 150 (1993): 479-492.

Marshall, I.H. "Lord's Supper." DPL , pp. 569-575.

Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians . Word Biblical Commentary, 40. Waco: Word, 1986.

________________ . The Spirit and the Congregation . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.

Michaels, J.R. "Peter." DPL , pp. 701-703.

Mitchell, Margaret M. Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation. An Exegetical Investigation of the Language and Composition of 1 Corinthians. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993 .

Mohrlang, R. "Love." DPL , pp. 575-578.

Morris, Leon. "Sacrifice Offering." DPL , pp. 856-858.

________________ . "Faith." DPL , pp. 285-291.

Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome. St. Paul's Corinth . Text and Archaeology . Good News Studies, 6. Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1983.

Nepos, Cornelius. Great General of Foreign Nations. Preface 4. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960.

Nock, Arthur Darby. "The Vocabulary of the New Testament." Journal of Biblical Literature 52 (1933): 131-139.

Noll, S.F. "Qumran and Paul." DPL , pp. 777-783.

O'Brien, Peter T. "Church." DPL , pp. 123-131.

________________ . Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul . Supplements to Novum Testamentum 49. Leiden: E.J. Brill. (1977): 107-137.

________________ . "Letters, Letter Form." DPL , pp. 550-553.

Osburn, Carroll D., Ed. "The Interpretation of 1 Cor 14:34-35." Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity . Vol. 1. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1993.

Oster, Richard E., Jr. "Christianity in Asia Minor." In ABD . Vol. 1. Ed. D.N. Freedman et al. New York: Doubleday, 1992, pp. 948-949.

________________ . "Use, Misuse and Neglect of Archaeological Evidence in Some Modern Works on 1 Corinthians." Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 83 (1992): 58-67.

________________ . "When Men Wore Veils to Worship." New Testament Studies . Vol. 34. (1988): 481-505.

Osiek, Carolyn. "The Feminist and the Bible: Hermeneutical Alternatives." In Feminist Perspectives on Biblical Scholarship . Ed. Adela Y. Collins. Chino, CA: Scholars Press, 1985.

Perkins, Pheme. Gnosticism and the New Testament . Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993.

Plass, Ewald M., Ed. What Luther Says: A Practical In-Home Anthology for the Active Christian . St. Louis: Concordia, 1991.

Plautus. Curculio 37-38. Trans. by P. Nixon. Loeb Classical Library, 5 vols. Vol. 2. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959.

Pliny the Elder. Natural History 28.2(3).10, 11. Translation taken from Jo-Ann Shelton, As the Romans Did: A Source Book in Roman Social History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968.

Plutarch. Bravery of Women 249E. Cited by K.O. Wicker. Plutarch's Ethical Writings and Early Christian Literature. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978 .

Pomeroy, S.B. Women in Hellenistic Egypt from Alexander to Cleopatra . Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1990.

Porter, Stanley. "Holiness, Sanctification." DPL, pp. 397-402.

Reasoner, M. "Citizenship, Roman and Heavenly." DPL , pp. 139-141.

Reese, D.G. "Demons, New Testament." ABD . Vol. 2., 140-142.

Ridderbbos, Herman N. Paul: An Outline of His Theology . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975.

Robeck, C.M., Jr. "Tongues." DPL , pp. 939-943.

Robertson, Archibald and Alfred Plummer. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. The International Critical Commentary. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1914.

Sampley, J. Paul. Walking Between the Times. Paul's Moral Reasoning. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991.

Sanders, E. P. Judaism. Practice and Belief 63 BCE-66 CE . Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1992.

Schmithals, Walther. Gnosticism in Corinth; an investigation of the letters to the Corinthians . Trans. J.E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971.

Scroggs, Robin. The New Testament and Homosexuality: Contextual Background for Contemporary Debate. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983.

________________ . "Paul and the Eschatological Women." Journal of the American Academy of Religion 40. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press (1972): 283-303.

Silva, M. "Old Testament in Paul." DPL , pp. 630-642.

Smith, D. "The Egyptian Cults at Corinth." Harvard Theological Review 70. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press (1977): 201-231.

South, James T. "A Critique of the 'Curse/Death' Interpretation of I Corinthians 5.1-8." New Testament Studies. 39 (1993): 539-561.

Spittler, R.P. Testament of Job. In The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha . Vol.1. Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. Ed. J.H. Charlesworth. Garden City: Doubleday, 1983.

Stein, R.H. "Jerusalem." DPL , pp. 463-474.

Stuart, Douglas. "Exegesis." ABD . Ed. D.N. Freeman, et al. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Sumney, Jerry. Identifying Paul's Opponents . Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement 40. Sheffield: JSOT, 1990.

Theissen, G. The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity . Trans. H. Schütz. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982.

Towner, P.H. "Household and Household Codes." DPL , pp. 417-419.

Trebilco, P. "Itineraries, Travel Plans, Journeys, Apostolic Parousia." DPL , pp. 446-456.

Vermes, G., Trans. The Dead Sea Scrolls in English . Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1968.

Walters, James. Ethnic Issues in Paul's Letter to the Romans: Changing Self-definitions in Earliest Roman Christianity . Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1993.

West, Allen B. Corinth . Vol. VIII. Pt. II. Latin Inscriptions 1896-1926. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931.

Winter, Bruce. "Rhetoric." DPL , pp. 820-822.

Wiseman, James. "Corinth and Rome I:228 B.C.-A.D. 267." In Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt . Edited by H. Temporini and W. Haase. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter (1979) II.7.1: 491-496.

Witherington, Ben III. Conflict and Community in Corinth. A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995.

Yamauchi, Edwin. Pre-Christian Gnosticism: A Survey of the Proposed Evidences . 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

ABD . . . Anchor Bible Dictionary

AUSS . . . Andrews University Seminary Studies

BA . . . Biblical Archaeology

BAGD . . . Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker

BAR . . . Biblical Archaeology Review

BiblThecSac . . . Bibliotheca Sacra

BJRL . . . Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BTr . . . Bible Translator

CMM . . . Introduction to the New Testament by Carson, Moo, L. Morris

ChrSt . . . Christian Standard

DPL . . . Dictionary of Paul and His Letters

ed. . . . edited by

EQ . . . Evangelical Quarterly

ExpT . . . Expository Times

HTR . . . Harvard Theological Review

JBL . . . Journal of Biblical Literature

JSNT . . . Journal of Studies in the New Testament

JETS . . . Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JTS . . . Journal of Theological Studies

n. . . . note

NovT . . . Novum Testamentum

NTS . . . New Testament Studies

RevEx . . . Review and Expositor

TB . . . Tyndale Bulletin

TDNT . . . Theological Dictionary of the New Testament

TS . . . Theological Studies

trans . . . translated by

WThJ . . . Westminster Theological Journal

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 1 Corinthians (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. INTRODUCTION - 1:1-9

A. Salutation - 1:1-3

B. Thanksgiving - 1:4-9

II. DISUNITY AND COMMUNITY FRAGMENTATION - 1:10-4:21

A. Divisions in the Church - 1:10-17

1. Report Received by Paul - 1:10-12

2. Christ Undivided - 1:13-17

B. Christ the Wisdom and Power of God - 1:18-2:5

1. The Message of the Cross - 1:18-19

2. Both Jews and Gentiles Offended - 1:20-25

3. God's Choice of Foolish Things - 1:26-31

4. Paul's Message Not Based on Eloquence - 2:1-5

C. Wisdom and Spiritual Maturity - 2:6-3:4

1. God's Secret Wisdom - 2:6-9

2. The Teaching of the Spirit - 2:10-16

3. Divisions a Sign of Worldliness - 3:1-4

D. God the Master Builder - 3:5-23

1. Paul and Apollos Merely Servants - 3:5-9

2. Building on the Foundation Laid by Paul - 3:10-17

3. God's View of Wisdom - 3:18-23

E. Apostles of Christ - 4:1-21

1. The Apostles as Servants of Christ - 4:1-5

2. Overcoming Human Pride - 4:6-7

3. Honor and Dishonor - 4:8-13

4. Paul's Warning as Father - 4:14-17

5. Arrogance to Be Confronted - 4:18-21

III. REPORTS OF IMMORALITY - 5:1-6:20

A. Discipline for the Immoral Brother - 5:1-13

1. The Corinthians' Pride in Tolerance - 5:1-5

2. Getting Rid of the Old Yeast - 5:6-8

3. Separating From Evil - 5:9-13

B. Lawsuits among Believers - 6:1-11

1. Settling Disputes in the Church - 6:1-8

2. The Inheritance of the Wicked - 6:9-11

C. Sexual Immorality - 6:12-20

1. The Body As a Member of Christ- 6:12-17

2. The Body As the Temple of the Holy Spirit - 6:18-20

IV. SEXUALITY, CELIBACY, AND MARRIAGE - 7:1-40

A. Godly Use of Sexuality - 7:1-7

B. Celibacy vs. Marriage - 7:8-11

C. Divorce and Separation - 7:12-16

D. Remaining as You Were Called - 7:17-28

E. Freedom from Concern - 7:29-40

V. DEALING WITH IDOLATRY - 8:1-11:1

A. Food Sacrificed to Idols - 8:1-13

1. The General Principle - 8:1-3

2. The Nonreality of Idols - 8:4-6

3. The Weak Brother's Dilemma - 8:7-8

4. The Proper Use of Freedom - 8:9-13

B. The Rights of an Apostle - 9:1-27

1. Paul's Rights as Apostle - 9:1-6

2. General Principle Stated - 9:7-14

3. Paul's Deferment of Rights - 9:15-18

4. To the Jew as a Jew - 9:19-23

5. Looking Forward to the Prize - 9:24-27

C. Warnings From Israel's History - 10:1-13

1. Wandering in the Desert - 10:1-5

2. Punishment for Sins - 10:6-10

3. Examples for Us - 10:11-13

D. Idol Feasts and the Lord's Supper - 10:14-22

1. The Lord's Supper a Participation - 10:14-17

2. The Lord's Table and the Table of Demons - 10:18-22

3. The Christian's Freedom - 10:23-11:1

VI. LITURGICAL ABERRATIONS - 11:2-34

A. Propriety in Worship - 11:2-16

1. Head Coverings in Worship - 11:2-10

2. Hair in the Nature of Things - 11:11-16

B. The Lord's Supper - 11:17-34

1. The Corinthians' Practice - 11:17-22

2. The Lord's Supper As Instituted - 11:23-26

3. Self-examination to Avoid Judgment - 11:27-34

VII. MISUNDERSTANDING OF SPIRITUAL GIFTS - 12:1-14:40

A. Spiritual Gifts - 12:1-11

1. Influence of the Spirit - 12:1-3

2. Different Gifts for a Common Good - 12:4-11

B. One Body, Many Parts - 12:12-31a

1. One Body in Christ - 12:12-13

2. Body Members Not Independent - 12:14-20

3. Special Honor for Weaker Parts - 12:21-26

4. Application to the Body of Christ - 12:27-31a

C. Love - 12:31b-13:13

1. Gifts Without Love Pointless - 12:31b-13:3

2. The Virtues of Love - 13:4-7

3. The Permanence of Love - 13:8-13

D. Gifts of Prophecy and Tongues - 14:1-25

1. Tongues and Prophecy Compared - 14:1-5

2. Tongues and Clarity - 14:6-12

3. The Spirit and the Mind - 14:13-19

4. Maturity and Spiritual Gifts - 14:20-25

E. Orderly Worship - 14:26-40

1. Control of Tongues and Prophecy - 14:26-33

2. Submission of Women - 14:34-35

3. Everything Fitting and Orderly - 14:36-40

VIII. MISUNDERSTANDING OF BELIEVERS' RESURRECTION - 15:1-58

A. The Gospel Paul Preached - 15:1-11

1. Relation of the Corinthians to the Gospel - 15:1-2

2. Basic Issues of the Gospel - 15:3-4

3. Appearances and Apostleship - 15:5-11

B. Christ's Resurrection and the Resurrection

of the Dead - 15:12-34

1. Consequences of Denying the Resurrection - 15:12-19

2. The Fact of Christ's Resurrection - 15:20-28

3. Baptism, Suffering, and the Resurrection - 15:29-34

C. Answers to Some Problems about the

Resurrection - 15: 35-58

1. A Twofold Question - 15:35-41

2. An Explanation of the Resurrection of the Dead - 15:42-50

3. The Secret Revealed - 15:51-58

IX. INSTRUCTION FOR THE COLLECTION - 16:1-11

A. The Collection for God's People - 16:1-4

B. Paul's Travel Plans - 16:5-9

C. Assisting Timothy - 16:10-11

X. CONCLUSION - 16:12-24

A. Personal Requests - 16:12-18

B. Final Greetings - 16:19-24

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV