Michael's Abbey Bible Study - 1 Corinthians Chapter 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? Paul changes the subject to his own apostleship in the context of the discussion on Christian freedom. Although he doesn't explicitly say, this section may be answering another question in the letter from the Corinthians. Paul begins by asking rhetorical questions. "Not" can be translated as "Is it not so?" The obvious expectation that the answer is yes to each of these questions.
Paul plainly states what he has alluded to earlier in this letter six times, that he is an apostle of Jesus, meaning one with the authority of God.
That he saw Jesus with his own eyes, (on the road to Damascus,) is one of the qualifications to be an apostle. In Galatians 1:16 he tells that this happened so he could be the apostle to the Gentiles. The purpose of the office of apostle was to be the standard of the true gospel. This prevented heresies from taking over. Today we have their written word in scripture to serve that function after they were gone. We don't have apostles today because no one living saw Jesus with their own eyes and learned the gospel from His own lips. But we don't need them as we have scripture.
That Paul established the church in Corinth and other cities is more evidence of his being an apostle. In 1 Corinthians 4:15 Paul reminded them that they have many teachers, but only one father, Paul.
2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. This is in response to those who have claimed that Paul is not a legitimate apostle. The wording suggests, but does not insist, that the "others" who are questioning are internal to the Corinthian church rather than the outsiders referred to in 2 Corinthians.
Roman officials had metal seals as a sign of their office. A document they sent out, like a decree, would have melted wax dripped onto the parchment and their seal would be pressed into it. This was like an authenticating signature. Paul is saying that the fact that they even exist as a Christian church in Corinth is an authentication of his apostleship. (In 15:12-19 Paul made the point that if he is not an apostle, they are not truly in Christ.)
3 My defense to those who examine me is this: Paul is being judged by factions in the Corinthian church. As he is the founder, an apostle of Christ, and has the mission to uphold the gospel, this has grave implications for the continuation of the Corinthian church as a Christian institution. As we read earlier, there were factions who were trying to drag them into heresy and meaningless rabbit holes. This explains the serious nature of this letter.
4 Do we not have a right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? One of the arguments used against Paul was that he did not do what the other apostles did. It's like they were saying, "Paul doesn't look and act like one…" When Peter would go to a city, he was supported partly by the local church and partly by other supporting churches. Thus he was able spend all his time teaching. He ate and drank what was provided by his host. Also, Peter was married and brought his wife with him. All the other Apostles were like this. Paul did not do any of this in Corinth, although he accepted financial aid and lodging from other churches and church members elsewhere. In Corinth he strictly supported himself.
Jesus' brothers were not apostles as they were not with Jesus during his ministry. In fact, they didn't believe Jesus was the Messiah until after they saw him resurrected. This is normal little brother behavior to look at the eldest with disrespect and disbelief. They became part of the church at that point. And Jesus' half-brother James became the head of the church. Paul specifically mentions Peter, (using the Aramaic Cephas,) as an individual even though he was one of the apostles. This is probably because Paul was most often compared to Peter on these differences such as accepting payment, bringing his wife with him, and so on.
6 Or do only Barnabas and I not have a right to refrain from working? It is likely that the problem for Paul's critics was not just that Paul worked instead of being supported by the new church in Corinth, but that he worked in a trade, (tent-making,) which was viewed as a demeaning position. Paul did accept help from other churches, but never from Corinth. As the Corinthian church suffered from repeated problems of arrogance and egotistic conceit, it is possible that Paul's humility in working a trade to support himself without any support from that church was to combat this tendency. Although he did work in other locations, he would accept support from some of them as well.
The mention of Barnabas doesn't mean he was with Paul in Corinth, but that Barnabas was also well known to support himself by working a trade during his evangelistic journeys.
7 Who at any time serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat the fruit of it? Or who tends a flock and does not use the milk of the flock? These are all rhetorical questions illustrating that Paul had the right to the support of the church he founded, even if he chose not to take it.
In the example of flock, "use" is literally "eat" in the Greek. It means consuming the milk and cheese. But as we don't use the word eat for milk, other English words are used for translation. Consume or partake the produce of might be a clearer translation.
8 I am not speaking these things according to human judgment, am I? Or does not the Law also say these things? Here the argument shifts from logic and tradition to their scriptural basis. The law here refers specifically to the Torah, (the first five books of the Old Testament,) rather than to the entire Old Testament.
9 For it is written in the Law of Moses, "You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing." God is not concerned about oxen, is He? In answering his own rhetorical question, Paul quotes the law in Deuteronomy 25:4. (This is also quoted in 1 Timothy 5:18)
After grain plants were harvested, the grain would be separated from the plant by threshing. The thresher was a large, flat wood plank with a curved front like a toboggan. The flat surface had a lot of stones pounded into the wood making a tight offset pattern. The farmer would sit on this to provide more downforce, and an animal would drag this over the harvest to separate the grain from the plants.
When the ox would eat from the threshing floor, he would get more than just the stalks of the plants, but would consume some of the grain that hadn't been separated yet. By muzzling the ox, a stingy farmer would ensure that the ox only got the leftover hay after the threshing. But this was considered cruel treatment as the ox would be faced with food the entire time it was working but unable to eat any of it.
Today we use a combine harvester combines reaping, threshing, collecting and winnowing in one. They use metal teeth for threshing instead of stones in wood.
The last sentence is a rhetorical question with the answer being no. While this law was written at the time of the law for the right treatment of animals, it was also concerned with the Israelites showing mercy and compassion. Scripture is explicit in Matthew 10:31, Luke 12:24 and Genesis 1:26-27 that we are worth far more than animals. Therefore, we should treat animals with respect, mercy and compassion, and other people with many times more so.
10 Or is He speaking altogether for our sake? Yes, for our sake it was written, because the plowman ought to plow in hope, and the thresher to thresh in hope of sharing the crops. Paul specifically asserts that God is really concerned about the worker being justly treated. All those responsible for the harvest, the planter, harvester, and thresher, are entitled to benefit from the harvest. It is their just wage for their labor given in anticipation of the later benefit. (One of the ways the Philistines persecuted the Israelites in Gideons time was to take everything a farmer harvested leaving nothing.)
11 If we sowed spiritual things in you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? Paul takes the farming metaphor and applies it here to the service of teachers in the church. (The historical record does not show that teachers were supported for full time service by the local churches they were working at in the first century. However, they were normally paid an honorarium by the church they were serving, with the remainder of their needs being taken care of by support from other churches, the donations of rich patrons, and uncommonly, their own secular labor.
12 If others share the right over you, do we not more? Nevertheless, we did not use this right, but we endure all things so that we will cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ. Other teachers, and especially the other apostles, were paid for their service to a local church. Since Paul was their founder and teacher for the first two years he definitely had the right to do the same. However, Paul states that the reason he did not was so that the gospel message would be received without hinderance. Perhaps the Holy Spirit revealed that would happen if he did take money from them, or perhaps it was his own wisdom seeing what kind of people they were.
He indicates that endured hardship because of this. At one point he was not able to fully support himself through his tent making. People only buy tents when they need them. So it seems there was a dry spell during which Paul went hungry rather than take anything from the Corinthians until money from the Philippians could arrive to cover the gap in Paul's income.
13 Do you not know that those who perform sacred services eat the food of the temple, and those who attend regularly to the altar have their share from the altar? Priests in Judaism and pagan religions would eat from the offerings to God or the idols for their own maintenance. This was their due for their holy service. (This is detailed in Leviticus 6:16 & 26, 7:6, Numbers 5:9, 18:8-20, 31, and Deuteronomy 18:1) Even those who were just workers in the temple and not actually priests were supported this way as well.
14 So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel. Jesus own words directed those who preach the gospel to be supported by those they reach, such as when he sent out the 72 in pairs in Luke 10:1-12.
Matthew 10:9-10 "Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your money belts, or a bag for your journey, or even two coats, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support." Luke 10:8 "Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you;"
15 But I have used none of these things. And I am not writing these things so that it will be done so in my case; for it would be better for me to die than have any man make my boast an empty one. Paul states he didn't accept anything that was his rightful due of local support as teacher, founder and apostle. And he clarifies that he is not saying this now to get them to send a retroactive payment. And he would rather die that let that claim be contradicted by someone now supporting him from Corinth.
While the exact reason why Paul accepting support would hinder the gospel is not specified, it is likely that Paul knew his taking money from them would be used against him later since his not taking it is being used against him here. But that would have been a stronger argument against him.
16 For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I do not preach the gospel. Paul is not referring to an inner compulsion or inner angst as the wording of this verse could mean in today's secular culture. It was his divinely appointed task in life to preach the gospel. Thus, merely doing his duty is nothing to boast about. And if he didn't do it he would face God's judgement, like the man with one talent who buried it in the ground.
17 For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me. A person who voluntarily works is entitled to pay. A slave has no choice and is not entitled to any pay for his labor. The household manager metaphor Paul used regarding his apostleship in 4:1 was often a slave, like Joseph in the house of Potiphar. Paul's ministry was a divine stewardship.
18 What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may offer the gospel without charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. What is Paul's reward? On the one hand, he has argued that as an apostle it is his right to be paid by the local church as other apostles are. And on the other hand he has argued that he is Christ's slave, and a slave is not entitled to pay for doing their assigned duty. He stated his reward is that he was able to preach the gospel without charge rather than use his right to be paid. By this he was not obligated to anyone. Thus he was free to preach without any restriction or imposition by another.
19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. Paul is free in that he is not financially dependent on anyone, and therefore free of any human limitations on his teaching. He used this freedom so he might freely become a slave, that is to conform to the expectations of others in order that they will also be won to Christ.
20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law though not being myself under the Law, so that I might win those who are under the Law; This is how Paul used his freedom. His focus was always on winning people to Christ, relating to them where they were in order that he might share the gospel. Whether someone was kosher or not didn't matter to God. But people get caught up in such things. So Paul acted according their needs, as long as it didn't violate his Christian faith.
21 to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. Those without the law here refers to those who do not have the law of Moses, which is the gentiles. When in the house of a Gentile Paul would eat whatever was put in front of him, ignoring the Jewish dietary restrictions. This is because as a Christian he was not under the Mosaic law and was free from such restrictions.
Paul did add one qualification. While he related to people where they are and was not bound by the law of Moses, he did not violate Christ's law. He wouldn't visit the temple prostitutes to win over people who do that because that violates God's law. But he would still find a way to connect with them that didn't violate God's law.
22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. Whatever was a person's situation or condition, Paul became someone they could relate to in order to reach them with the gospel. In Acts 17 while in Athens which was full of idols he used an idol to an unknown god to relate the gospel message in a way the Athenians could relate to. He in no way watered down or changed the gospel message ever. But he did what he could to build a bridge to everyone so they could receive the true and complete gospel.
23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it. Paul's motivation was for the gospel to be spread to everyone possible. To be a partaker of the gospel means to gain its promises such as eternal life, restoration of our relationship with God, and so on. To be a fellow partaker means Paul's hope was to have others join him in gaining the benefits of the gospel. Thus his motivation was ultimately to reach as many as possible with the gospel so they would join him in paradise.
24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. Paul here is relating to the Corinthians using their own culture. Greek cities would have a stadium with a running track. This was so important to their culture that the length of the stadium's track was used as a major unit of measure, the stadia. By employing a running competition metaphor he was being Greek to reach the Greeks.
Again Paul writes "do you not know" to let the Corinthians know they ought to know these things. While everyone runs in the race, there is only one winner who gets the prize. Running a race is related to living a Christian life. Thus Paul directs us to run to win. It goes without saying that anyone can win our race. All one has to do is endure to the finish. All who complete our race win.
This is not to be confused with a justification by works. Paul repeatedly and strongly argues against that. We are saved by grace. Our only part in that is to choose to accept it. However, if we really do believe we are saved by Jesus, then it would only naturally follow that we would want to be His disciples and would want to share that with others.
25 Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. They then do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. In the running analogy, the competitors exercise self-control in all things, which refers to disciplining their bodies. One part of this was training, which would include running, weightlifting, and other exercises to promote strength and endurance. Another part was that they would eat what would help their physical fitness, and abstain from that which would hinder. This would also include discipline in what they drank as getting drunk would hinder their fitness to train and compete.
The Greek running competitors did all that work to win a wreath that would decay and perish. What we will be rewarded with is imperishable. Everything of this world is perishable. Therefore this is a heavenly reward, first and foremost of which is being a part of heaven.
26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; Continuing the sports analogy of training, Paul cites his own way inferring that we should do the same. The sports competitor can just run anywhere as only the distance and time matter, and the boxer can just punch at air to practice his movements and combinations. We as Christians are not doing things that are pointless here and now. The sportsman is thinking only about winning the future competition. While we Christians are also thinking of our future reward, we are also concerned with what and how we do things in the here and now. Our actions here and now must be materially for the advancement of Christ's kingdom.
27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified. Paul practiced self-discipline and self-control, making his body obey his will instead of being driving by the desires of the body. Thus he would be living out his faith and not led astray.
This is in direct contradiction of the pagan culture then and today. Today the Phil Donahue/Oprah/Woke ideology proclaims "you have to be honest with your feelings" and be your "true" self. Somehow, this is supposed to make us happy and fulfilled. But as we read in Jeremiah 17:9, the heart is deceitful, sick and twisted. Those who follow their heart have terrible lives. Who wants to go to work? Who wants to do the dishes? Who wants to exercise self-control in their appetites, both for food and for pleasure? Who wants to even get out of bed in the morning? But failing to do these things as we ought results in a messed-up life. If we do not exercise self-control we will be led by our passions, and led away from Christ.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB © The Lockman Foundation.

If you have a question, you can find the email address to write to on the FAQ Page under the Questions FAQ.

1 Cor. 8   -   1 Corinthians   -   1 Cor. 10

Bible Study Page   -   Michael's Abbey