Book of 1 Corinthians - Ch. 9, Vs. 1-27 (01/14/2001)

1 Corinthians 9: Paul’s Apostleship and the Seal of His Ministry

Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ, our Lord? Are not ye my work in the Lord? That sums up chapter 9. Have I not seen Jesus Christ? Without this he could not have been one of those first grand witnesses.

Are you not my work in the Lord? 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.

And upon this they said he was not an apostle. If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you. For the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord. They of all people should have realized that he was an apostle.

And for the most part they did. As if he had said here, whatsoever others do, you of all men should not question my apostleship. For you were converted by it. You confirmed and ratified my ministry, that it is of God, and that God is in it, and of a truth.

The conversion of sinners and the building up of the saints is God's seal of our ministry. Verse 3. Mine answer to them that do examine me is this. Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead about a sister or a wife as well as other apostles?

And as the brethren of the Lord and Cephas, he points out Peter, who evidently had lived with his wife even after he was an apostle, that he had no rights as an apostle which were not common to men that were common to St. Paul.

Or I only and Barnabas have not we power to forbear working? Who goes to warring 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?

He's putting forth an argument that is self-evident, that answers its own questions. Would a person plant a vineyard and not partake of the fruit of it? All these answers are no. Would a man go to war of his own volition?

That he may not seem to burden the apostles, he shows that it is just what they do. By an argument of comparison, seeing that soldiers live by their wages and husbandmen by the fruits of their labors, and shepherds by that which comes from a flock.

The Right of Gospel Workers to Be Supported

Say I these things as a man, or sayeth not the law the same thing that was in the law for years and years, that he that lives by the gospel gets his wages by the gospel. He has that prerogative. For it is written in the law, Moses, thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out her corn.

Doth God take care for the oxen? If the ox, let alone a man, if the ox was not prohibited from eating of the corn as it thrashed it, then a man certainly not muzzles the ox. The ox had a right to support from those who he labored, and they could not withhold it.

Who required it of them? Take care of the oxen. It is for the sake of the oxen that this precept is given. That is, oxen alone, or is it just the oxen? No, it's using the oxen as an example. Now, the apostle proceeds to show that the law in question is designed to contain a general principle for the benefit of those who labor in spiritual being, spiritual things.

Now, say it all again. If the members of the congregation...

They would be sinning if they felt that they should give and they don't. For them to not give when they have opportunity, and when it is laid upon them to do so, they sin. There's nothing mandatory about it.

It is totally free will. Now, the law of the tithe is no longer demanded. They paid three tithes. That law was demanded, and they would sin if they did not participate. But it's not like that in today's world.

We should give. We should give to our pastor. We should give to all of those that lead. But if they choose to not take that, then there's nothing wrong with that. Yes. If you feel led to give, yes. Does that answer your question?

Yes. Yes, that's right. There's no rule of the church that they give. There's no rule in the Bible as such. It's all a personal thing, yes.

Even though Paul and Barnabas here declined, if they were convicted by the Lord to give, they should give to build up a storehouse for the church. Even though Paul and Barnabas didn't, if they felt led to give, the members of the congregation should give.

Yes, yes. He's saying even though Barnabas and Paul did not want the money, they still, in their heart, had a desire that they were tied or to bring money, that they still had to give.

Right? Or should. Well, if you feel led to give, you should give. Yes.

That's right. David, you want to say something? Well, I think verse 15 shows us not to receive what he said. Scriptures say we are supposed to give to the local church. Paul and Barnabas did not. When you read about the ox, it talks about taking care of the ox's needs.

So, if there's not a need, then that money can go towards other needs in the local church. The answer to that question is, you should give as the Lord leads. Because there's always a need for that somewhere in the local church ministry.

Yes. What I've kept in mind is, Paul and Silas were effectively themselves making a gift to the church when they didn't accept that payment. And for another person, other than Paul and Barnabas, to say, okay, because Paul and Barnabas made this gift, then I don't have to.

Effectively, what they've done is, they have negated the gift of Paul and Barnabas, at least to the church itself. I don't think they've negated it as far as God is concerned. But what the church has done is...

We dare not hide behind someone giving. If the pastor chooses to not take, then we cannot say, well, that's a load off my mind. And not give. That's not the reason you give. You give because you're led to give.

There may be some catastrophe coming that will be needed. So, you cannot out-give God. Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no. No doubt. This is written, that he that plows should plow in hope, and he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.

Paul is saying that they had a perfect right to take it. They had a perfect right to use it. And on the one hand, they could use it. But they chose not to. They chose to work. And to not put that burden upon the church.

If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing that we shall reap your carnal things? If you have been the means of bringing to you the divine gospel, is it too much to ask of you for our substance of living?

He says, no. But he didn't choose to. He would work at night. He would work during the day if he wasn't preaching. His main job was preaching the gospel. He supported it by working. I think our main job is preaching the gospel.

We support it by various means. If others be partakers of this 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.

Nevertheless, he tells them that himself and Barnabas, although they had this unquestionable liberty, yet they never made use of it, but suffered hunger and thirst, weariness and want, lest in obstructing the course and hindering the progress of the gospel.

It becomes a problem. It becomes a problem if we let it. To give to the church because the pastor needs it, or not to give because he doesn't need it. He is just a member of the church. Do you not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple?

They have had that example. And they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar. Under the Old Testament, this was true. Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live at the gospel.

In like manner, says the apostle, it is the Lord's pleasure and appointment now under the gospel, Matthew 10, 10, Luke 10, 7, that they who preach the word should be maintained for it, and not diverted from the work by the cares and business of the world, but have a livelihood from their labor.

Paul’s Refusal of Support and the Danger of Hiding Behind It

But I have used none of these things, 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 glory void. He was afraid that if they gave him, then they could say that they helped make him.

The apostle was charged by false teachers. It was quite a problem in that church. The false teachers, the men that had come before and after, took from the church some of them for the wrong reason. The gospel for his profit and advantage, whereas the glory and the contrary, that he would make the gospel without charge, looking upon it as his great honor, that he could and did preach the gospel freely for sincere ends and not out of sinister respects and professions.

He had rather die by starving and lose his advantage of glory. Paul takes this position privately. He does not set it down as an example for everybody. But he says, as for me, I would rather die than to lose the advantage of glory.

For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of. For necessity it laid upon me, yea, worried. Woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel. I feel the same way of teaching. Woe unto me if I don't teach.

That's why my present predicament is such a burden to me. I can't think like I used to. It's coming back, but slow. I appreciate you waiting on it. Now, if I do this thing willingly, that is, freely, without demanding anything of you for my pains, which I might do, I have a reward.

It's just that simple. That is a special reward from God and may glory in it. But if I preach unwillingly, demanding a maintenance for my pains and refuse to preach without it, all that can be said is this, that a dispensation of the gospel is committed to me, and so in preaching I only discharge a trust of which I cannot boast or glory.

If he took pay for it, then it was just a job. For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward. But if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me, that is my reward then, verily that which I preach the gospel, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.

What is my reward then? I think we have a perfect example in our preacher. He preaches because he wants to, because he has to. He's not paid for it. Although I am under no obligation to any man, yet I act as if every individual had a particular property in me, and as if I were the slave of all the public.

Yes? I would guess that this day it was the pain of the pastor to anyone who did the work of the Lord. They should be paid for it.

Well, you think every pastor should be paid?

Well, no, I'm not saying it's their choice to pay, but I'm saying it's anyone who works.

I think the church should be willing to pay everybody that works, and everybody that works should not be willing to take it.

And the second choice is I think that if it's against my will, I've been expressed as a stewardship, then it also applies to people who give, because if we give and expect it because we say we have to, then we don't receive the blessing.

That's right. If we give because we do it out of obedience to God because we want to. That's right. You know, he who doesn't works in an incident. That's right. Then that's good. And then those who don't have the need, if they forego taking it, that's good too.

It kind of goes back to Diane's answer last week with whatever issue it was we were discussing. It has to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit, and he will let you know which case should be applied in a specific case.

That's right. Yes? But if we're not giving and having it there for that, then it's not there with me. So the primary thing is if we know to do good and we do not do it, it's a sin. If the Lord asks that we bring our actions obvious, I don't think it's obvious.

I don't think I can do enough. And maybe that's the wrong. I just think everything, my house, my plant, that plant is sin. So in that perspective, in bringing that to the church when it's there, even if they say they don't want it, it's there when the meat comes up for the blessing.

Right? That's right. And I think that's the part I'm trying. Some people think that you're an idolater because you want to give all this, but if it's in the church, it's there for them, when the need is present, we can do it.

Instead of saying when a need is present, oh, my God, this person's in trouble, or we need to help them, and then we have to invest it. How to do it? Do you understand? But if it's set in there and the Lord lays it on your heart, you just go take it out of your heart.

If a person's sick and you brought a plant to the church and you both feel that someone should go visit, you can take that plant out, but he's shown you it's there for him.

I think that all gifts should be to the church anonymously. Everybody that gives should give it unknown. I don't think that Greg ought to write out a check. Bill ought to write out a check. This is just my own personal feelings, and I don't follow it, but I think all gifts should be given anonymously.

Yes? Yes.

Yes, that's right. Yes. Trudy? That's right. That's right. Yes? Yes. You're asking. That means what we're talking about. I recognize that you're being obedient to God by giving all that you have. No. No, not me, but that obedience, my love for God.

It's like the woman that took the oil out of the lamp, and she took it, and she took it in front of everybody, and she took the oil and she rubbed it on the Lord's head, and she gave all that she had.

They all saw that. And they knew she could have used it for many other things, and judged her for that, but she brought the oil, and she rubbed it on the head because she knew she was bringing it to the Lord.

Becoming All Things to All Men and Running for the Prize

To the Jews I became as a Jew, conforming myself in all things in their manner of thinking and living so far as I could with innocence. I like to put in there, instead of innocence, my Christian principles allow me to.

As under the law, observing it myself while I am among them, not that he declared this to be his necessity, or refused to converse with those who did not observe it. He himself observed it. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews to them that are under the law, as under the law that I might gain them that are under the law.

To them that are without law as without law, being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ, that I might gain them that are without law. Do you see what he's saying? Do you understand what he's saying, Greg?

They were the Gentile. So he was a Gentile when he was with them. He was a Jew when he was with the Jew. He was whoever he was with. Yes. To the weak I became as weak, that I might gain the weak. I have made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

He knew not what he would save or who he would save, but he became as they to all men. And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you. Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize?

So run that you may obtain. What's he mean, one in a race, Bill? He's not talking about salvation. Know ye not that they which run in a race all, but one receiveth the prize? If you'll do that for an earthly prize, if you'll all get together and run a race, you know just one's going to win and receive the crown.

It's not like that in Christianity. But we should all run with the same idea. And everyone that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible.

Therefore, so 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 that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

That has nothing to do with salvation. I keep my body and bring it into subjection. What's that mean?

All right, all right.

When I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. What's he mean by that, Bill? What does castaway mean, Greg? Thrown out? How do you answer that, David? In today's world, they can wait a while and come back.

Disgusted ahead of time. You couldn't have been that fool without it. Clarence, would you dismiss us, please, sir?