1 Corinthians 9

1 Corinthians 9:1

9:1 As we know, there were those in Corinth who questioned Paul’s authority. They said that he was not one of the twelve, and therefore not a genuine apostle. Paul protests that he was free from human authority, a genuine apostle of the Lord Jesus. He bases his claim on two facts. First of all, he had seen Jesus Christ our Lord in resurrection. This took place on the road to Damascus. He also points to the Corinthians themselves as proof of his apostleship by asking the question, Are you not my work in the Lord? If they had any doubt as to his apostleship, they should examine themselves. Were they saved? Of course they would say they were. Well, who pointed them to Christ? The Apostle Paul did! Therefore, they themselves were proof of the fact that he was a genuine apostle of the Lord. 9:2 Others may not recognize him as an apostle, but surely the Corinthians themselves should. They were the seal of his apostleship in the Lord.9:3 Verse 3 probably refers to what has gone before (and not to what follows, as the NKJV punctuates it). Paul is saying that what he has just said is his defense to those who examine him, or who question his authority as an apostle. 9:4 In verses 4-14, the apostle discusses his right to financial support as an apostle. As one who had been sent by the Lord Jesus, Paul was entitled to financial remuneration from the believers. However, he had not always insisted on this right. He had often worked with his hands, making tents, in order that he might be able to preach the gospel freely to men and women. No doubt his critics took advantage of this, suggesting that the reason that he did not take support was that he knew he was not a real apostle. He introduces the subject by asking a question: Do we have no right to eat and drink?that iswithout having to work for it?

Are we not entitled to be supported by the church?9:5 Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? Perhaps some of Paul’s critics suggested that Paul did not marry because he knew that he and his wife would not be entitled to the support of the churches. Peter and the other apostles were married, as were also the brothers of the Lord. Here the apostle is stating that he would have just as much right to be married and enjoy the support of the Christians for both his wife and himself. The expression to take along a believing wife refers not only to the right to marry, but also to the right of support for both husband and wife. The brothers of the Lord probably means His actual half-brothers, or possibly His cousins.

This text alone does not solve the problem, although other Scriptures indicate that Mary did have other children after Jesus, her Firstborn (Luk_2:7; see Mat_1:25; Mat_12:46; Mat_13:55; Mar_6:3; Joh_2:12; Gal_1:19). 9:6 It appears that Barnabas, like Paul, had worked to provide for his material needs while preaching the gospel. Paul asked if they both did not have the right to refrain from working and to be cared for by the people of God. 9:7 The apostle based his first claim to financial support on the example of the other apostles. He now turns to an argument from human affairs. A soldier is not sent to war at his own expense. Whoever plants a vineyard is never expected to do so without receiving some recompense from its fruit. Finally, a shepherd is not expected to keep a flock without being given a right to partake of the milk. Christian service is like warfare, agriculture, and pastoral life. It involves fighting against the enemy, caring for God’s fruit trees, and serving as an under-shepherd for His sheep. If the right of support is recognized in these earthly occupations, how much more should it be in the service of the Lord! 9:8 Paul next turns to the OT for further proof of his point. Does he have to base his argument merely on these mundane things of life, such as warfare, agriculture, and shepherding? Does not the Scripture say the same thing? 9:9 It is clearly stated in Deu_25:4 that an ox should not be muzzled while it treads out the grain. That is, when an animal is used in a harvesting operation, it should be allowed to partake of some of the harvest. Is it oxen God is concerned about? God does care for oxen, but He didn’t cause these things to be written in the OT merely for the sake of dumb animals. There was a spiritual principle involved to be applied to our life and service. 9:10 Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? The answer is yes, our welfare was in His mind when these words were written. When a man plows, he should plow with the expectation of some remuneration. So likewise, when a man threshes, he should be able to look forward to some of the harvest in recompense. Christian service resembles plowing and threshing, and God has decreed that those who engage in these aspects of His service should not do so at their own expense. 9:11 Paul speaks of himself as having sown spiritual things for the Christians at Corinth. In other words, he came to Corinth preaching the gospel to them and teaching them precious spiritual truths. That being so, is it asking too much if in return they should minister to him of their finances or other material things? The argument is that the wages of the preacher are greatly inferior in value to what he has given. Material benefits are small compared with spiritual blessings.9:12 Paul was aware that the church at Corinth was supporting others who were preaching or teaching there. They recognized this obligation to other men but not to the Apostle Paul, and so he asks: If others are partakers of this right over you, are we not even more?

If they recognized the right of others to financial support, why should they not then recognize that he, their father in the faith, had this right? Doubtless some of those who were being supported were the Judaizing teachers. Paul adds that, although he had this right, he did not use it with the Corinthians but endured all things lest he hinder the gospel of Christ. Rather than insist on his right to receive support from them, he bore all sorts of privations and hardships so that the gospel would not be hindered. 9:13 Paul next introduces the argument from the support of those who served in the Jewish temple. Those who had official duties in connection with the temple service were supported from the income the temple received. In this sense they lived off the things of the temple. Also, the priests themselves who served at the altar were given a certain portion of the offerings that were brought to the altar. In other words, both the Levites, who had the ordinary duties around the temple, and the priests, to whom were entrusted the more sacred duties, were alike supported for their service. 9:14 Finally, Paul introduces the definite command of the Lord Himself. He commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel. This would be conclusive proof alone of Paul’s right to support from the Corinthians. But this raises the question of why he did not insist on being supported by them. The answer is given in verses 15-18. 9:15 He explains that he used none of these things, that is, he did not insist on his rights. Neither was he writing these things at the present time in order that they might send money to him. He would rather die than that anyone should be able to rob him of his boasting. 9:16 Paul is saying that he cannot boast in the fact that he preaches the gospel. A divine compulsion is laid upon him. It is not a vocation that he chose for himself. He received the tap on the shoulder and he would have been a most miserable man if he had not obeyed the divine commission. This does not mean the apostle was not willing to preach the gospel, but rather that the decision to preach did not come from himself, but from the Lord. 9:17 If the Apostle Paul preached the gospel willingly, he would have the reward that goes with such service, namely, the right of maintenance. Throughout the Old and New Testaments, it is clearly taught that those who serve the Lord are entitled to support from the Lord’s people. In this passage, Paul does not mean that he was an unwilling servant of the Lord, but is simply stating that there was a divine compulsion in his apostleship. He goes on to emphasize this in the latter part of the verse. If he preached against his will, that is, if he preached because there was a fire burning within him and he could not refrain from preaching, then he had been entrusted with a stewardship of the gospel. He was a man acting under orders, and therefore he could not boast in that. Verse 17 is admittedly difficult, and yet the meaning seems to be that Paul would not claim his right of maintenance from the Corinthians because the ministry was not an occupation which he chose by himself. He was placed in it by the hand of God. The false teachers in Corinth might claim their right to be supported by the saints, but the Apostle Paul would seek his reward elsewhere. Knox’s translation of this verse is as follows: I can claim a reward for what I do of my own choice; but when I act under constraint, I am only executing a commission.Ryrie comments: Paul could not escape his responsibility to preach the gospel, because a stewardship (responsibility) had been committed to him and he was under orders to preach even though he was never paid (cf. Luk_17:10). 9:18 If then he could not boast in the fact that he preached the gospel, of what would he boast? Of something that was a matter of his own choice, namely, that he presented the gospel of Christ without charge. This is something he could determine to do. He would preach the gospel to the Corinthians, at the same time earning his own living, so as not to use to the full his right for maintenance in the gospel. To summarize the apostle’s argument here, he is making a distinction between what was obligatory and what was optional. There is no thought of any reluctance in his preaching the gospel. He did that cheerfully. But in a very real sense, it was a solemn obligation that rested upon him. Therefore in the discharge of that obligation there was no reason for his boasting. In preaching the gospel, he could have insisted on his right to financial support, but he did not do this; rather he decided to give the gospel without charge to the Corinthians.

Since this was a matter of his own will, he would glory in this. As we have suggested, Paul’s critics claimed that his working as a tentmaker indicated that he did not consider himself to be a true apostle. Here he turns his self-support in such a way as to prove that his apostleship was nonetheless real; in fact, it was of a very high and noble character. In verses 19-22, Paul cites his example of the waiving of legitimate rights for the gospel’s sake. In studying this section, it is important to remember that Paul does not mean that he ever sacrificed important principles of the Scripture. He did not believe that the end justified the means. In these verses he is speaking about matters of moral indifference. He accommodated himself to the customs and habits of the people with whom he worked in order that he might gain a ready ear for the gospel. But never did he do anything which might compromise the truth of the gospel. 9:19 In one sense he was free from all men. No one could exercise jurisdiction or compulsion over him. Yet he brought himself under bondage to all people in order that he might win the more. If he could make a concession without sacrificing divine truth he would do it in order to win souls to Christ. 9:20 To the Jews he became as a Jew, that he might win Jews. This cannot mean that he put himself back under the Law of Moses in order to see Jews saved. What it does mean might be illustrated in the action which Paul took in connection with the circumcision of Timothy and Titus. In the case of Titus, there were those who insisted that unless he was circumcised, he couldn’t be saved. Realizing that this was a frontal attack on the gospel of the grace of God, Paul stoutly refused to have Titus circumcised (Gal_2:3). However, in the case of Timothy it seems that no such issue was involved. Therefore, the apostle was willing that Timothy should be circumcised if this would result in a wider hearing of the gospel (Act_16:3). To those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law. Those who are under the law refers to the Jewish people. But Paul had already spoken of his dealings with the Jews in the first part of the verse. Why does he then repeat the subject here? The explanation that has often been offered is that when he speaks of Jews in the first part of the verse, he is referring to their national customs, whereas here he is referring to their religious life. At this point a brief word of explanation is necessary. As a Jew, Paul had been born under the law. He sought to obtain favor with God by keeping the law, but found that he was unable to do so. The law only showed him what a wretched sinner he was, and utterly condemned him. Eventually he learned that the law was not a way of salvation, but only God’s method of revealing to man his sinfulness and his need of a Savior. Paul then trusted in the Lord Jesus Christ, and in so doing he became free from the condemning voice of the law. The penalty of the law which he had broken was paid by the Lord Jesus on the cross of Calvary. After his conversion, the apostle learned that the law was not the way of salvation, nor was it the rule of life for one who had been saved. The believer is not under law but under grace. This does not mean that he can go out and do as he pleases. Rather, it means that a true sense of the grace of God will prevent him from even wanting to do these things. Indwelt by the Spirit of God, the Christian is raised to a new level of behavior. He now desires to live a holy life, not out of fear of punishment for having broken the law, but out of love for Christ, who died for him and rose again. Under law the motive was fear, but under grace the motive is love. Love is a far higher motive than fear. Men will do out of love what they would never do from terror. Arnot says: God’s method of binding souls to obedience is similar to His method of keeping the planets in their orbitsthat is, by flinging them out free. You see no chain keeping back these shining worlds to prevent them from bursting away from their center. They are held in the grip of an invisible principle. … And it is by the invisible bond of lovelove to the Lord who bought themthat ransomed men are constrained to live soberly and righteously and godly. With that brief background in mind, let us now get back to the latter half of verse 20. To those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law. When he was with Jewish people, Paul behaved as a Jew in matters of moral indifference. For instance, he ate the foods which the Jewish people ate and refrained from eating such things as pork which were forbidden to them. Perhaps Paul also refrained from working on the Sabbath day, realizing that if he did this, the gospel might gain a more ready hearing from the people. As a born-again believer in the Lord Jesus, the Apostle Paul was not under the law as a rule of life. He merely adapted himself to the customs, habits, and prejudices of the people in order that he might win them to the Lord. 9:21 Ryrie writes: Paul is not demonstrating two-facedness or multi-facedness, but rather he is testifying of a constant, restrictive self-discipline in order to be able to serve all sorts of men. Just as a narrowly channeled stream is more powerful than an unbounded marshy swamp, so restricted liberty results in more powerful testimony for Christ. To those who are without law, Paul acted as one without law (although he himself was not without law toward God, but under law toward Christ). Those who are without law does not refer to rebels or outlaws who do not recognize any law, but is a general description of Gentiles. The law, as such, was given to the Jewish nation and not to the Gentiles. Thus when Paul was with the Gentiles he complied with their habits and feelings as far as he could possibly do so and still be loyal to the Savior. The apostle explained that even while he thus acted as without law, he was nevertheless not without law toward God. He did not consider that he was free to do as he pleased, but he was under law toward Christ.

In other words, he was bound to love, honor, serve, and please the Lord Jesus, not now by the Law of Moses, but by the law of love. He was enlawed to Christ. We have an expression When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Paul is saying here that when he was with the Gentiles, he adapted himself to their manner of living as far as he could consistently do so and still be loyal to Christ. But we must keep in mind that this passage deals only with cultural things and not with doctrinal or moral matters. 9:22 Verse 22 speaks of those who are weak or overscrupulous. They were excessively sensitive about matters that were really not of fundamental importance. To the weak, Paul became as weak, that he might win them. He would be a vegetarian if necessary rather than offend them by eating meat. In short, Paul became all things to all men, that he might by all means save some. These verses should never be used to justify a sacrifice of scriptural principle.

They merely describe a readiness to accommodate to the customs and habits of the people in order to win a hearing for the good news of salvation. When Paul says that I might by all means save some, he does not think for a moment that he could save another person, for he realized that the Lord Jesus was the only Person who could save. At the same time it is wonderful to notice that those who serve Christ in the gospel are so closely identified with Him that He even allows them to use the word save to describe a work in which they are involved. How this exalts and ennobles and dignifies the gospel ministry! Verses 23-27 describe the peril of losing one’s reward through lack of self discipline. To Paul the refusal of financial help from the Corinthians was a form of rigid discipline. 9:23 Now this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I may be partaker of it with you. In the preceding verses Paul had been describing how he submerged his own rights and desires in the work of the Lord. Why did he do this? He did it for the gospel’s sake, in order that he might share in the triumphs of the gospel in a coming day. 9:24 Doubtless as the apostle wrote the words found in verse 24, he was reminded of the Isthmian games that were held not far from Corinth. The Corinthian believers would be well-acquainted with those athletic contests. Paul reminds them that while many run in a race, not all receive the prize. The Christian life is like a race. It requires self-discipline. It calls for strenuous effort.

It demands definiteness of purpose. The verse does not, however, suggest that in the Christian race only one can win the prize. It simply teaches that we should all run as winners. We should all practice the same kind of self-denial that the Apostle Paul himself practiced. Here, of course, the prize is not salvation, but a reward for faithful service. Salvation is nowhere stated to be the result of our faithfulness in running the race.

Salvation is the free gift of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. 9:25 Now Paul changes the figure from running to wrestling. He reminds his readers that everyone who competes in the games, that is, wrestles, exercises self-control in all things. A wrestler once asked his coach, Can’t I smoke and drink and have a good time and still wrestle? The coach replied, Yes, you can, but you can’t win! As Paul thinks of the contestants at the games, he sees the winner stepping up to receive his prize. What is it? It is a perishable crown, a garland of flowers or a wreath of leaves that will soon wither away. But in comparison he mentions an imperishable crown which will be awarded to all those who have been faithful in their service to Christ. We thank Thee for the crown Of glory and of life; ‘Tis no poor withering wreath of earth, Man’s prize in mortal strife; ‘Tis incorruptible as is the Throne, The kingdom of our God and His Incarnate Son. Horatius Bonar 9:26 In view of this imperishable crown, Paul states that he therefore runs not with uncertainty, and fights not as one who beats the air. His service was neither purposeless nor ineffectual. He had a definite aim before his eyes, and his intention was that his every action should count. There must be no wasted time or energy. The apostle was not interested in wild misses. 9:27 Instead, he disciplined his body, and brought it into subjection, lest when he had preached to others, he himself might be rejected or disqualified. In the Christian life, there is a necessity for self-control, for temperance, for discipline. We must practice self-mastery. The Apostle Paul realized the dread possibility that after he had preached to others, he himself might be disqualified. Considerable debate has centered on the meaning of this verse. Some hold that it teaches that a person can be saved and then subsequently lost. This, of course, is in conflict with the general body of teaching in the NT to the effect that no true sheep of Christ will ever perish. Others say that the word translated disqualified is a strong word and refers to eternal damnation. However, they interpret the verse to mean that Paul is not teaching that a person who was ever saved could be disqualified, but simply that one who failed to exercise self-discipline had never been really saved in the first place. Thinking of the false teachers and how they indulged every passion and appetite, Paul sets forth the general principle that if a person does not keep his body in subjection, this is proof that he never really was born again; and although he might preach to others, he himself will be disqualified. A third explanation is that Paul is not speaking here of salvation at all but of service. He is not suggesting that he might ever be lost, but that he might not stand the test as far as his service was concerned and might be rejected for the prize. This interpretation exactly fits the meaning of the word disqualified and the athletic context. Paul recognizes the awful possibility that, having preached to others, he himself might be put on the shelf by the Lord as no longer usable by Him. In any event, the passage is an extremely serious one and should cause deep heart-searching on the part of everyone who seeks to serve the Lord Christ. Each one should determine that by the grace of God he will never have to learn the meaning of the word by experience. As Paul has been thinking of the necessity for self-control, the example of the Israelites comes before his mind. In chapter 10, he remembers how they became self-indulgent and careless in the discipline of their bodies, and thus became disqualified and disapproved. First of all, he speaks of the privileges of Israel (vv. 1-4); then the punishment of Israel (v. 5); and finally the causes of Israel’s downfall (vv. 6-10). Then he explains how these things apply to us (vv. 11-13).