1 Corinthians · Chapter 9

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

Have I not seen Jesus Christ?-Without this he could not have been one of those first grand witnesses.

Are not ye my work in the Lord-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.

Verse 1. Amos 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 labours 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 defence.

Amos I not an apostle? Amos 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. 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 Acts 22:14, 15; 26:16. 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: Amos 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.

Verses 1, 2. Am I not, &c. — It appears from this, and several other passages of the epistles to the Corinthians, that some of them, influenced probably by false teachers, who had crept in among them, objected to St. Paul’s 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, inferring from this circumstance that he did not judge himself entitled to any such privilege, and therefore had wrought at a trade, to support himself thereby. Hence, after deciding some very difficult questions, which the Corinthians had proposed to him, and particularly after affirming, in the end of chap. 7., that he had decided these questions by the inspiration of the Spirit; and after showing himself a faithful apostle of Christ, by declaring, in the end of the last chapter, his resolution on all occasions to abstain from things indifferent, rather than, by using his liberty respecting them, to lead his fellow-Christians into sin; he with great propriety introduces the proof of his apostleship, and answers all the objections and calumnies whereby his enemies endeavoured to discredit him in the eyes of the Corinthians. Am I not — As truly as any man living; an apostle? — Divinely appointed and commissioned by the Lord Jesus? Am I not free — To act as I think best, with regard to receiving a maintenance from those to whom I minister or not? Have I not the liberty of a common Christian, yea, and that of an apostle, so as to have a right to preach the gospel without reward, if I think fit so to do? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord — After his resurrection, so as to be able to bear witness to that important fact on my own knowledge, as confidently as those who saw him before I did? Unless he had seen Christ, he could not have been one of his first grand witnesses, could not have borne testimony to his resurrection on his own knowledge thereof. Are not you — In respect of your conversion, gifts, graces, privileges; my work in the Lord — The fruit of my ministry as an apostle among you, by means of God’s grace and power working with me? If I be not an apostle to others — So visibly and demonstratively; yet doubtless I am to you — Who, of all people in the world, can show the least excuse for questioning my mission; for the seal of my apostleship — The certain evidence of my divine call; are ye in the Lord — Who have not only received faith by my mouth, but all the gifts of the Spirit by my hands.

Verse 1. Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my work in the Lord? Having illustrated the legal customs of the jews respecting meats, he introduces another subject, his right to temporal support for his spiritual labours. Some jews, it would seem, ever hostile to Paul, had insinuated that because, for the most part, he had eaten his own bread at Corinth, he had no fair claims on the funds of churches. This point he argues with decision. He had seen the Lord in the way to Damascus, and in the temple. Acts 9. 22:21. He was commissioned by the Lord, and the church of Corinth was the chief sphere of his labours in Greece, where he had many seals to his ministry.

1. He asserts his apostolic freedom and prerogative, 1-6.

Ver. 1.-3. Free: further expounded in 1 Corinthians 9:19. In view of his purpose to lay a restriction on his own food because of the weaker brethren, Paul asserts virtually in this question his full liberty to eat what he likes.

An apostle: the first rank (1 Corinthians 12:28) in the church, and therefore least likely to be under restrictions. See note, Romans 1:1. Seen Jesus our Lord; supports the assertion implied in Am I not an apostle? Doubtless it refers specially, though perhaps not exclusively, (cp. Acts 22:18-21,) to the appearance of Christ on the way to Damascus. Then (Acts 26:16ff) or shortly afterwards (Acts 22:14) he received his commission to the Gentiles. Cp. Galatians 1:1, 16. This question suggests that they only were apostles who received a commission immediately from the lips of Christ.

Are not you etc.; proof, from evident matter-of-fact, that Paul was indeed an apostle.

In the Lord: objectively and subjectively; as in 1 Corinthians 1:2. The historic facts of Christ were the basis upon which, and the living presence of Christ was the spiritual element in which, were wrought the results attained by Paul at Corinth. 1 Corinthians 9:2 Develops the proof implied in the foregoing question.

Others may doubt my claims: you cannot. Of this, 1 Corinthians 9:2b is proof.

Seal: a visible, solemn, authoritative attestation. See Romans 4:11. The church at Corinth being evidently God's work, was a conspicuous and divine attestation of Paul's often repeated claim that by the immediate voice of Christ he had been called to be an apostle. For, no impostor or fanatic could produce the abiding and blessed results which had followed Paul's preaching. Similar argument in 1 Corinthians 15:15. To those who examine (same word as in 1 Corinthians 4:3f) me. The present tense suggests that Paul's apostleship was frequently called in question. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:22.

Is this; refers probably to 1 Corinthians 9:1-3, in which Paul has given complete proof of an important point, viz. his apostleship, rather than to 1 Corinthians 9:4ff, where Paul, on the ground of the proof given in 1 Corinthians 9:1-3, merely claims equal rights with the other apostles.

V. 2. Ye are the seal of my apostleship-Who have received not only faith by my mouth, but all the gifts of the Spirit by my hands.

Verse 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. 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 sfragiv 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.

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.

Verses 1, 2. Am I not, &c. — It appears from this, and several other passages of the epistles to the Corinthians, that some of them, influenced probably by false teachers, who had crept in among them, objected to St. Paul’s 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, inferring from this circumstance that he did not judge himself entitled to any such privilege, and therefore had wrought at a trade, to support himself thereby. Hence, after deciding some very difficult questions, which the Corinthians had proposed to him, and particularly after affirming, in the end of chap. 7., that he had decided these questions by the inspiration of the Spirit; and after showing himself a faithful apostle of Christ, by declaring, in the end of the last chapter, his resolution on all occasions to abstain from things indifferent, rather than, by using his liberty respecting them, to lead his fellow-Christians into sin; he with great propriety introduces the proof of his apostleship, and answers all the objections and calumnies whereby his enemies endeavoured to discredit him in the eyes of the Corinthians. Am I not — As truly as any man living; an apostle? — Divinely appointed and commissioned by the Lord Jesus? Am I not free — To act as I think best, with regard to receiving a maintenance from those to whom I minister or not? Have I not the liberty of a common Christian, yea, and that of an apostle, so as to have a right to preach the gospel without reward, if I think fit so to do? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord — After his resurrection, so as to be able to bear witness to that important fact on my own knowledge, as confidently as those who saw him before I did? Unless he had seen Christ, he could not have been one of his first grand witnesses, could not have borne testimony to his resurrection on his own knowledge thereof. Are not you — In respect of your conversion, gifts, graces, privileges; my work in the Lord — The fruit of my ministry as an apostle among you, by means of God’s grace and power working with me? If I be not an apostle to others — So visibly and demonstratively; yet doubtless I am to you — Who, of all people in the world, can show the least excuse for questioning my mission; for the seal of my apostleship — The certain evidence of my divine call; are ye in the Lord — Who have not only received faith by my mouth, but all the gifts of the Spirit by my hands.

2. Maintains the minister’s right to pecuniary support from the Church by the law of compensation, 7-14.

Ver. 1.-3. Free: further expounded in 1 Corinthians 9:19. In view of his purpose to lay a restriction on his own food because of the weaker brethren, Paul asserts virtually in this question his full liberty to eat what he likes.

An apostle: the first rank (1 Corinthians 12:28) in the church, and therefore least likely to be under restrictions. See note, Romans 1:1. Seen Jesus our Lord; supports the assertion implied in Am I not an apostle? Doubtless it refers specially, though perhaps not exclusively, (cp. Acts 22:18-21,) to the appearance of Christ on the way to Damascus. Then (Acts 26:16ff) or shortly afterwards (Acts 22:14) he received his commission to the Gentiles. Cp. Galatians 1:1, 16. This question suggests that they only were apostles who received a commission immediately from the lips of Christ.

Are not you etc.; proof, from evident matter-of-fact, that Paul was indeed an apostle.

In the Lord: objectively and subjectively; as in 1 Corinthians 1:2. The historic facts of Christ were the basis upon which, and the living presence of Christ was the spiritual element in which, were wrought the results attained by Paul at Corinth. 1 Corinthians 9:2 Develops the proof implied in the foregoing question.

Others may doubt my claims: you cannot. Of this, 1 Corinthians 9:2b is proof.

Seal: a visible, solemn, authoritative attestation. See Romans 4:11. The church at Corinth being evidently God's work, was a conspicuous and divine attestation of Paul's often repeated claim that by the immediate voice of Christ he had been called to be an apostle. For, no impostor or fanatic could produce the abiding and blessed results which had followed Paul's preaching. Similar argument in 1 Corinthians 15:15. To those who examine (same word as in 1 Corinthians 4:3f) me. The present tense suggests that Paul's apostleship was frequently called in question. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:22.

Is this; refers probably to 1 Corinthians 9:1-3, in which Paul has given complete proof of an important point, viz. his apostleship, rather than to 1 Corinthians 9:4ff, where Paul, on the ground of the proof given in 1 Corinthians 9:1-3, merely claims equal rights with the other apostles.

V. 3. My answer to them who examine me-Concerning my apostleship. Is this-Which I have now given.

Verse 3. Mine answer to them] hJ emh apologia toiv eme anakrinousin. This is my defence 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 defence therefore was this, that they were converted to God by his means. This verse belongs to the two preceding verses.

Verses 3-5. Mine answer — My apology; to them that examine and censure me — As to this part of my conduct, is this which follows. Have we not power — I and my fellow-labourers; to eat and to drink — At the expense of those among whom we labour? Does our declining the use of a privilege prove that we have it not? Have we not power to lead about with us — In our apostolical travels; a sister, a wife — That is, a wife who is a sister in Christ, a believer in him, and truly pious; and to demand sustenance for her also? as well as other apostles — Who therefore, it is plain, did this: and Peter? Hence we learn, 1st, That Peter continued to live with his wife after he became an apostle; 2d, That he had no rights, as an apostle, which were not common to Paul. “In the eastern countries, when people of condition travelled, they either lodged with their acquaintance, or carried servants with them, who provided such things as were necessary for their accommodation in the public lodging-houses. In the Gentile countries, where the apostles preached, they had no acquaintance or friends with whom they could lodge, and therefore some of them, particularly the brethren of the Lord, and Peter, found it necessary to carry about with them wives to make provision for them, at the expense of those to whom they preached. This right, Paul told the Corinthians, belonged as much to him and to Barnabas as to the other apostles. But to render the gospel free of charge, he neither had used this right, verse 12, nor ever would use it, verse 15. Wherever he came he maintained himself by his own labour.” — Macknight.

3. Declares why he renounced that right, namely, because his glory and his reward were a gratis gospel, 15-19. In accordance with this self-sacrifice,

Ver. 1.-3. Free: further expounded in 1 Corinthians 9:19. In view of his purpose to lay a restriction on his own food because of the weaker brethren, Paul asserts virtually in this question his full liberty to eat what he likes.

An apostle: the first rank (1 Corinthians 12:28) in the church, and therefore least likely to be under restrictions. See note, Romans 1:1. Seen Jesus our Lord; supports the assertion implied in Am I not an apostle? Doubtless it refers specially, though perhaps not exclusively, (cp. Acts 22:18-21,) to the appearance of Christ on the way to Damascus. Then (Acts 26:16ff) or shortly afterwards (Acts 22:14) he received his commission to the Gentiles. Cp. Galatians 1:1, 16. This question suggests that they only were apostles who received a commission immediately from the lips of Christ.

Are not you etc.; proof, from evident matter-of-fact, that Paul was indeed an apostle.

In the Lord: objectively and subjectively; as in 1 Corinthians 1:2. The historic facts of Christ were the basis upon which, and the living presence of Christ was the spiritual element in which, were wrought the results attained by Paul at Corinth. 1 Corinthians 9:2 Develops the proof implied in the foregoing question.

Others may doubt my claims: you cannot. Of this, 1 Corinthians 9:2b is proof.

Seal: a visible, solemn, authoritative attestation. See Romans 4:11. The church at Corinth being evidently God's work, was a conspicuous and divine attestation of Paul's often repeated claim that by the immediate voice of Christ he had been called to be an apostle. For, no impostor or fanatic could produce the abiding and blessed results which had followed Paul's preaching. Similar argument in 1 Corinthians 15:15. To those who examine (same word as in 1 Corinthians 4:3f) me. The present tense suggests that Paul's apostleship was frequently called in question. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:22.

Is this; refers probably to 1 Corinthians 9:1-3, in which Paul has given complete proof of an important point, viz. his apostleship, rather than to 1 Corinthians 9:4ff, where Paul, on the ground of the proof given in 1 Corinthians 9:1-3, merely claims equal rights with the other apostles.

V. 4. Have we not power-I and my fellowlabourers. To eat and to drink-At the expense of those among whom we labour.

Verse 4. Have we not power to eat and to drink?] Have we not authority, or right, exousian, 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 laboured 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 labourer is worthy of his hire; and he that preaches the Gospel should live by the Gospel.

Verses 3-5. Mine answer — My apology; to them that examine and censure me — As to this part of my conduct, is this which follows. Have we not power — I and my fellow-labourers; to eat and to drink — At the expense of those among whom we labour? Does our declining the use of a privilege prove that we have it not? Have we not power to lead about with us — In our apostolical travels; a sister, a wife — That is, a wife who is a sister in Christ, a believer in him, and truly pious; and to demand sustenance for her also? as well as other apostles — Who therefore, it is plain, did this: and Peter? Hence we learn, 1st, That Peter continued to live with his wife after he became an apostle; 2d, That he had no rights, as an apostle, which were not common to Paul. “In the eastern countries, when people of condition travelled, they either lodged with their acquaintance, or carried servants with them, who provided such things as were necessary for their accommodation in the public lodging-houses. In the Gentile countries, where the apostles preached, they had no acquaintance or friends with whom they could lodge, and therefore some of them, particularly the brethren of the Lord, and Peter, found it necessary to carry about with them wives to make provision for them, at the expense of those to whom they preached. This right, Paul told the Corinthians, belonged as much to him and to Barnabas as to the other apostles. But to render the gospel free of charge, he neither had used this right, verse 12, nor ever would use it, verse 15. Wherever he came he maintained himself by his own labour.” — Macknight.

4. He made himself, within the limits of right, all things to all men, in order to win them to Christ, 20-22.

Ver. 4.- 6. After proving his apostleship, Paul now begins to prove (1 Corinthians 9:4-14) his claim to be supported by the church. He thus introduces the specific matter of 1 Corinthians. 9.

Eat and drink: at the cost of the church. For God to give Paul a work which so occupied him that he could not earn (2 Corinthians 11:8) sufficient food, and yet to forbid him to be supported by his converts, would be practically to forbid him to eat and drink. Contrast Luke 10:7.

We; includes (1 Corinthians 9:6) Barnabas, and perhaps others. Contrast 1 Corinthians 9:1-3. The mention of eating, in a matter quite different recalls 1 Corinthians 8:13.

As wife: see 1 Corinthians 7:2: to be maintained by the church. To refuse this, would be practically to forbid the apostles to marry. Lead about: as companion of their apostolic journeys. These words seem to imply that at least Paul was not married: so 1 Corinthians 7:8. And the words following imply clearly that most of the apostles and certainly Cephas (cp. Matthew 8:14) and the brothers of the Lord were, when Paul wrote, living in married life. The mention here of the brothers of the Lord reveals their important position among the early Christians. Cp. Acts 1:14. The mention of Cephas suggests that opponents are referred to here belonging to the Cephas-party. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:22. If so, these words betray their inconsistency. The mention of Barnabas implies that he, Paul's earliest missionary companion and originally a man of property, (Acts 4:37; 13:2,) shared the resolve to labor at a trade rather than be maintained by his converts. To refuse Paul's claim to maintenance, is to make “him and Barnabas” exceptions to the other apostles. “Am I forbidden to eat and drink? To forbid me to be maintained by the church, amounts to this. Do not the other apostles, whose equal I have proved to be, and even Cephas, whose disciples my opponents profess to be, claim maintenance not only for themselves but for their wives? Have I and Barnabas been specially forbidden to desist, even while preaching the Gospel, from manual toil?”

Estius, (who, however, honestly corrects the order of the words in the papal Vulgate,) following Tertullian, On Monogamy ch. 8, Jerome, Against Jovinian bk. i. 26, Augustine, The work of monks chs. 4, 5, supposes that Paul refers in 1 Corinthians 9:5 to Christian ladies who accompanied the apostles in their journeys, and at the cost of themselves or others supplied their wants; and compares Matthew 27:55; Mark 15:41; Luke 8:2f. But this supposition has no historic ground whatever except this verse. For the explanations of this verse by Tertullian, Jerome, and Augustine, cannot be accepted as such. The suggested practice would lie open to grave suspicion; especially as Paul speaks of leading about one sister. The entire context shuts out all thought of a lady who at her own cost supplied the apostle's need. And the added word wife cannot be accounted for except as indicating that the sister in Christ was also a wife. Acts 22:1, a rhetorical appeal with different order of words, is no parallel to the plain language of this verse. That some of the apostles were married, Estius admits.

The brothers of the Lord, will be discussed under Galatians 1:19.

V. 5. Have we not power to lead about with us a sister, a wife-And to demand sustenance for her also?

As well as the other apostles-Who therefore, it is plain, did this. And Peter-Hence we learn, 1. That St. Peter continued to live with his wife after he became an apostle: 2. That he had no rights as an apostle which were not common to St. Paul.

Verse 5. Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife] The word exousian is to be understood here, as above in 1 Corinthians 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 Matthew 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: esqiei, kai pinei, kai gamei-eikonav ecei touv apostolouv, 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 chap. 7.

Verses 3-5. Mine answer — My apology; to them that examine and censure me — As to this part of my conduct, is this which follows. Have we not power — I and my fellow-labourers; to eat and to drink — At the expense of those among whom we labour? Does our declining the use of a privilege prove that we have it not? Have we not power to lead about with us — In our apostolical travels; a sister, a wife — That is, a wife who is a sister in Christ, a believer in him, and truly pious; and to demand sustenance for her also? as well as other apostles — Who therefore, it is plain, did this: and Peter? Hence we learn, 1st, That Peter continued to live with his wife after he became an apostle; 2d, That he had no rights, as an apostle, which were not common to Paul. “In the eastern countries, when people of condition travelled, they either lodged with their acquaintance, or carried servants with them, who provided such things as were necessary for their accommodation in the public lodging-houses. In the Gentile countries, where the apostles preached, they had no acquaintance or friends with whom they could lodge, and therefore some of them, particularly the brethren of the Lord, and Peter, found it necessary to carry about with them wives to make provision for them, at the expense of those to whom they preached. This right, Paul told the Corinthians, belonged as much to him and to Barnabas as to the other apostles. But to render the gospel free of charge, he neither had used this right, verse 12, nor ever would use it, verse 15. Wherever he came he maintained himself by his own labour.” — Macknight.

Ver. 5. A sister, or a wife. The Greek word gunh gyne, in this place is obscure. The Vulgate reads, a woman sister, and the papists avail themselves of it to prove the celibacy of the first preachers. Ambrose translates it in the plural, women, meaning wife, mother, or a young and unprotected sister. It designates a deaconess, as in Romans 16:1. The private duties of the synagogue were discharged by matrons, who alone could have access to their afflicted sisters.

5. Thus to attain the final prize, like an athlete, he earnestly disciplines and subdues himself that he may not become at last a castaway, 23-27.

Ver. 4.- 6. After proving his apostleship, Paul now begins to prove (1 Corinthians 9:4-14) his claim to be supported by the church. He thus introduces the specific matter of 1 Corinthians. 9.

Eat and drink: at the cost of the church. For God to give Paul a work which so occupied him that he could not earn (2 Corinthians 11:8) sufficient food, and yet to forbid him to be supported by his converts, would be practically to forbid him to eat and drink. Contrast Luke 10:7.

We; includes (1 Corinthians 9:6) Barnabas, and perhaps others. Contrast 1 Corinthians 9:1-3. The mention of eating, in a matter quite different recalls 1 Corinthians 8:13.

As wife: see 1 Corinthians 7:2: to be maintained by the church. To refuse this, would be practically to forbid the apostles to marry. Lead about: as companion of their apostolic journeys. These words seem to imply that at least Paul was not married: so 1 Corinthians 7:8. And the words following imply clearly that most of the apostles and certainly Cephas (cp. Matthew 8:14) and the brothers of the Lord were, when Paul wrote, living in married life. The mention here of the brothers of the Lord reveals their important position among the early Christians. Cp. Acts 1:14. The mention of Cephas suggests that opponents are referred to here belonging to the Cephas-party. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:22. If so, these words betray their inconsistency. The mention of Barnabas implies that he, Paul's earliest missionary companion and originally a man of property, (Acts 4:37; 13:2,) shared the resolve to labor at a trade rather than be maintained by his converts. To refuse Paul's claim to maintenance, is to make “him and Barnabas” exceptions to the other apostles. “Am I forbidden to eat and drink? To forbid me to be maintained by the church, amounts to this. Do not the other apostles, whose equal I have proved to be, and even Cephas, whose disciples my opponents profess to be, claim maintenance not only for themselves but for their wives? Have I and Barnabas been specially forbidden to desist, even while preaching the Gospel, from manual toil?”

Estius, (who, however, honestly corrects the order of the words in the papal Vulgate,) following Tertullian, On Monogamy ch. 8, Jerome, Against Jovinian bk. i. 26, Augustine, The work of monks chs. 4, 5, supposes that Paul refers in 1 Corinthians 9:5 to Christian ladies who accompanied the apostles in their journeys, and at the cost of themselves or others supplied their wants; and compares Matthew 27:55; Mark 15:41; Luke 8:2f. But this supposition has no historic ground whatever except this verse. For the explanations of this verse by Tertullian, Jerome, and Augustine, cannot be accepted as such. The suggested practice would lie open to grave suspicion; especially as Paul speaks of leading about one sister. The entire context shuts out all thought of a lady who at her own cost supplied the apostle's need. And the added word wife cannot be accounted for except as indicating that the sister in Christ was also a wife. Acts 22:1, a rhetorical appeal with different order of words, is no parallel to the plain language of this verse. That some of the apostles were married, Estius admits.

The brothers of the Lord, will be discussed under Galatians 1:19.

V. 6. To forbear working-With our hands.

Verse 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 labour. 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 labour wherever they came.

Verses 6, 7. Or I only and Barnabas — Of all the preachers of the gospel; have not we power to forbear working — With our hands? “From this it appears that Barnabas, as well as Paul, preached the gospel without demanding a maintenance from his disciples; and that, like Paul, he was hated for his doctrine by the Judaizers. The honourable mention which Paul makes of Barnabas in this passage deserves notice, as it shows that these good men, notwithstanding their sharp contention about John Mark, Acts 15:13, entertained no resentment against each other on that account, but mutually esteemed each other: and perhaps, on some occasions after that, preached the gospel together, as before.” Who goeth a warfare — Serveth in the war; at any time, at his own charges — Does not the community furnish provisions for those who guard it, and fight its battles? And if the services of a soldier, engaged in the defence of his country, deserve a maintenance, how much more may it be expected by us, who daily hazard our lives, as well as wear them out, for men’s everlasting happiness? Who planteth a vineyard, and doth not think himself entitled to eat of the fruit of it? or who feedeth a flock, and doth not think he hath a right to eat of the milk of the flock? — And if it be judged reasonable that men should have an equivalent for their labours about natural things, and the accommodations of the body, is it not more evidently so when the felicity of immortal souls is concerned?

6. Precisely in continuance with this train of thought, in the next chapter he charges the Corinthians, not in the image of an athlete, but by the example of Israel in the wilderness, to escape a like cast-away finality, 1 Corinthians 10:1-14. Then the digression being closed, (as noted in our last note on chap. 8,) he resumes the topic of idol sacrifice.

1. Assertion of his apostolical right and prerogative, 1-6.

1. Am I not free?—By the best readings this question stands first, and forms the hinge from the previous topic to what follows. Do I thus subject myself to privation for others, even of food, because I am not truly a free man like yourselves? Nay, more, am I not an apostle?—And so entitled to the apostle’s maintenance, which I decline to receive? And as his apostleship is questioned, he adds a running interrogative assertion of it. Seen Jesus—The requisite qualification for being an apostle. See our notes on Luke 1:2; Acts 9:3. Ye my work—This practical proof convinced the council of Jerusalem of Paul’s apostleship, (notes on Acts 15:4, 6, 12,) as Paul more fully asserts to the Galatians, 2:7-9.

2. I am to you—A direct argumentum ad homines. Whoever else could gracefully question his apostleship the Corinthians could not. If they were true Christians, he was a true apostle. Seal—A seal on a document is a voucher for its genuineness and validity. The Corinthians converted by Paul, and their Church by him founded, were as a confirmatory seal upon his apostolic diploma. In the Lord—Note on Romans 9:1. Christ is the very embodiment of spiritual Christianity, and whoever is deeply centred in that is centred in Christ.

3. Them that do examine me—A judicial term, and may be rendered, my triers. It alludes to a class of Corinthian detractors who are brought into the foreground, and more fully answered in the second epistle. This— Followed by a period, and properly referring to the answer just given, not to what follows. His answer as to the validity of his apostleship is now complete. What follows is to assert that he is free.

4. Power—Rightful authority. The change from the I of the previous verses to the we of this doubtless anticipates the mention of Barnabas, verse 6, as included in the question. Eat… drink—Of the contributions of the Church.

5. Lead about—Implying an itinerancy, not a settled pastorate. A sister, a wife—A sister of the Church, who is a wife of the apostle. The English version gives the exact verbal Greek, except that the latter word may signify either wife or woman. That here, however, the word does not mean woman is plain, for a sister is of course a woman, and the latter word would be superfluous. If sister express a relation, so must the latter term. Dr. Wordsworth, however, renders it, as do some of the Greek and Roman fathers, a Christian woman. But the word sister alone would express that meaning. Wordsworth’s rendering assumes that the apostles took upon their circuits female attendants of suitable character, who should perform those Christian offices, such as baptism for females, who were in that age inaccessible to the male minister. But of this practice there is no trace in the New Testament or earliest Church history. Nor is the case of those women who upon occasions ministered to our Lord at all parallel. This erroneous view of the text was probably the occasion of the later introduction into the Church of an order of women called after this passage suneisaktai, which led to such immoralities that it was abolished by the Council of Nicea. The Rhemish (Romanistic) version unscrupulously transposes the terms, and reads a woman, a sister, which would give the same sense as Wordsworth, liable to the same objection. Tradition (which Romanism usually presses upon us as a binding authority) asserts, as this passage also implies, that several of the apostles were married, and Matthew 8:14 asserts that Peter (claimed as the first pope) was. Paul declares that “a bishop must be the husband of one wife.” When Orientalism became more fully developed in the Church, about the middle of the second century, virginity began to become an exaggerated virtue. As the popedom developed itself, the celibacy of the clergy, contrary to the above quoted express Scripture, was found to be a powerful aid to the central despotism. Separated from all other ties, the clergy became, as now, the devotees of absolute ecclesiastic power. Hence the pope has been the most violent advocate of celibacy, and the late enactment of the infallibility of the pope renders the dogma of clerical celibacy absolutely immutable. The brethren of the Lord—Who were not of the twelve apostles, but who, after the Lord’s resurrection, became apostolic men. See note on Matthew 13:55. Cephas—Mentioned here specially as the high authority with the Judaizers whom Paul is answering.

6. Barnabas—Note on Acts 15:39. It would appear that though Barnabas never visited Corinth, yet his name was familiar there. This is, indeed, probably true of most of the personages mentioned in the preceding verse. Indeed, the Corinthians seem to have been lively and critical canvassers of the eminent Christian leaders. Probably the fact that Barnabas was commissioned by the Gentile Church of Antioch (Acts 13:2) at the same time with Paul, would bring his name into the discussion. The Judaizers would maintain that the apostolic authority of both was equally illegitimate, having neither come from Christ nor started from Jerusalem. The inference drawn by some commentators, that Barnabas, like Paul, maintained himself by his own manual labour, is not valid. During the first apostolic tour, in which Barnabas and Paul were associated, their career appears to have been too rapid for such labour, and nothing of the kind is intimated in the narrative. Paul here asserts only Barnabas’s right; not that he declined to use the right. Forbear working—Working at manual labour for our support while we preach a gratuitous Gospel. Is it I and Barnabas alone that must preach for nothing, and support ourselves?

2. Ministers are entitled to support by the law of compensation, 7-14. By this law the soldier, the vintner, the shepherd, nay, the very oxen, are entitled to their recompense.

Ver. 4.- 6. After proving his apostleship, Paul now begins to prove (1 Corinthians 9:4-14) his claim to be supported by the church. He thus introduces the specific matter of 1 Corinthians. 9.

Eat and drink: at the cost of the church. For God to give Paul a work which so occupied him that he could not earn (2 Corinthians 11:8) sufficient food, and yet to forbid him to be supported by his converts, would be practically to forbid him to eat and drink. Contrast Luke 10:7.

We; includes (1 Corinthians 9:6) Barnabas, and perhaps others. Contrast 1 Corinthians 9:1-3. The mention of eating, in a matter quite different recalls 1 Corinthians 8:13.

As wife: see 1 Corinthians 7:2: to be maintained by the church. To refuse this, would be practically to forbid the apostles to marry. Lead about: as companion of their apostolic journeys. These words seem to imply that at least Paul was not married: so 1 Corinthians 7:8. And the words following imply clearly that most of the apostles and certainly Cephas (cp. Matthew 8:14) and the brothers of the Lord were, when Paul wrote, living in married life. The mention here of the brothers of the Lord reveals their important position among the early Christians. Cp. Acts 1:14. The mention of Cephas suggests that opponents are referred to here belonging to the Cephas-party. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:22. If so, these words betray their inconsistency. The mention of Barnabas implies that he, Paul's earliest missionary companion and originally a man of property, (Acts 4:37; 13:2,) shared the resolve to labor at a trade rather than be maintained by his converts. To refuse Paul's claim to maintenance, is to make “him and Barnabas” exceptions to the other apostles. “Am I forbidden to eat and drink? To forbid me to be maintained by the church, amounts to this. Do not the other apostles, whose equal I have proved to be, and even Cephas, whose disciples my opponents profess to be, claim maintenance not only for themselves but for their wives? Have I and Barnabas been specially forbidden to desist, even while preaching the Gospel, from manual toil?”

Estius, (who, however, honestly corrects the order of the words in the papal Vulgate,) following Tertullian, On Monogamy ch. 8, Jerome, Against Jovinian bk. i. 26, Augustine, The work of monks chs. 4, 5, supposes that Paul refers in 1 Corinthians 9:5 to Christian ladies who accompanied the apostles in their journeys, and at the cost of themselves or others supplied their wants; and compares Matthew 27:55; Mark 15:41; Luke 8:2f. But this supposition has no historic ground whatever except this verse. For the explanations of this verse by Tertullian, Jerome, and Augustine, cannot be accepted as such. The suggested practice would lie open to grave suspicion; especially as Paul speaks of leading about one sister. The entire context shuts out all thought of a lady who at her own cost supplied the apostle's need. And the added word wife cannot be accounted for except as indicating that the sister in Christ was also a wife. Acts 22:1, a rhetorical appeal with different order of words, is no parallel to the plain language of this verse. That some of the apostles were married, Estius admits.

The brothers of the Lord, will be discussed under Galatians 1:19.

Verse 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 labour. The first question applies particularly to the case of the apostle, tiv strateuetai idioiv oywnioiv. Does a soldier provide his own victuals? oywviov 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 Clarke on “Luke 3:14”.

Verses 6, 7. Or I only and Barnabas — Of all the preachers of the gospel; have not we power to forbear working — With our hands? “From this it appears that Barnabas, as well as Paul, preached the gospel without demanding a maintenance from his disciples; and that, like Paul, he was hated for his doctrine by the Judaizers. The honourable mention which Paul makes of Barnabas in this passage deserves notice, as it shows that these good men, notwithstanding their sharp contention about John Mark, Acts 15:13, entertained no resentment against each other on that account, but mutually esteemed each other: and perhaps, on some occasions after that, preached the gospel together, as before.” Who goeth a warfare — Serveth in the war; at any time, at his own charges — Does not the community furnish provisions for those who guard it, and fight its battles? And if the services of a soldier, engaged in the defence of his country, deserve a maintenance, how much more may it be expected by us, who daily hazard our lives, as well as wear them out, for men’s everlasting happiness? Who planteth a vineyard, and doth not think himself entitled to eat of the fruit of it? or who feedeth a flock, and doth not think he hath a right to eat of the milk of the flock? — And if it be judged reasonable that men should have an equivalent for their labours about natural things, and the accommodations of the body, is it not more evidently so when the felicity of immortal souls is concerned?

7. Who feedeth—Literally, who shepherdeth the flock. Eateth—Not the milk, but of or from the milk; that is, food made from the milk.

Ver. 7. His claim to maintenance, Paul has supported by an appeal to the example of the other apostles, whose equal he has proved himself to be. He now further supports it by appealing to his readers' sense of justice. His own rations: at his own expense. It includes both food and pay. Same word in Romans 6:23. These words remind us of the mercenary service so common at one time among the Greeks. This first comparison suggests that in the following comparisons Paul refers to those who plant and shepherd not as owners but as servants. Such expect naturally to be maintained out of the produce of their own toil.

The fruit: not “all the fruit.” He who produces may fairly claim to eat. From the milk; including both the butter and cheese made from, and the money derived from sale of, the milk. The man who tends the flock has food from its produce. Cp. 1 Corinthians 9:14, “live from the Gospel”; 1 Corinthians 10:4. Each of the above occupations Paul uses elsewhere (2 Corinthians 10:3; 1 Corinthians 3:6; Acts 20:28: cp. 1 Peter 5:2f) as metaphors of himself or of Christian teachers generally. It is evident that one who devotes himself to the care of others, and who by his own toil produces for them food and nourishing drink, has a right to be maintained by them.

V. 8. Do I speak as a man-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.

Verse 8. Say I these things as a man?] Is this only human reasoning? or does not God say in effect the same things? See Clarke’s note on “Romans 6:19”.

Verses 8-10. Say I these things as a man — Have I only human authority and reasons for what I say? or saith not the law — The revealed will of God; the same? For it is written — Deuteronomy 25:4, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox, &c. — But shalt allow the poor animal to feed while it is labouring for thee, in the midst of food; a circumstance in which its hunger would be peculiarly painful. It is well known, that the people of the East did not thresh their corn as we do; but they pressed out the grain, by causing oxen to tread on the ears, a custom which is still retained in several of the eastern nations. “And, at this day,” as Bengelius observes, “horses tread out the corn in some parts of Germany.” Doth God take care for oxen — Was this precept given merely for their sakes? had he not a further meaning in it? did he not intend to show hereby what equity should be used in rewarding those that labour for us? For our sakes no doubt this is written — Not to oblige us to obey those laws, but to teach us to exercise humanity and equity toward those we employ or deal with. This precept, concerning oxen, being introduced in the law, immediately after precepts enjoining justice and mercy in punishments, it was certainly intended to impress the Israelites with a sense of the obligations of justice and humanity toward rational creatures, as the apostle here affirms. That he that plougheth should plough in hope — Of reaping; and he that thresheth in hope — Should not be disappointed of the fruit of his labour; that is, any one that is employed to work for us, should do it in hope of receiving a meet reward for his pains, whereby he may be encouraged in his work, and should be partaker of his hope — Should afterward receive the reward hoped for. And so ought they who labour faithfully in God’s husbandry.

8. As a man—Literally, after or according to man, that is, to man’s authority; in distinction from, according to God’s law.

Ver. 8.-10. These things: about the shepherd and the vinedresser. Not as a man, i.e. merely asserting a principle current among men, (cp 1 Corinthians 15:32; Galatians 3:15,) does Paul speak; but says that which the Law also says.

Moses: an appeal to the authority of the great Lawgiver; to whose lips the following injunction, taken word for word from Deuteronomy 25:4, LXX., is expressly (Deuteronomy 5:1; 27:1) attributed. It is quoted also, in a similar connection, in 1 Timothy 5:18. It refers to oxen treading out grain with their feet, or dragging over it a threshing machine. Both modes are still common in the east: and the injunction of Moses is observed by both Christians and Mohammedans. See Thompson, Land and Book ch. xxxv.

Is it for the oxen etc.; must be interpreted to mean, not, “does God care for oxen?” but, “was it His care for them that prompted these words.” Altogether: not, “for us only;” but that every letter of Deuteronomy 25:4 was written because of us, viz. for those who labor to provide spiritual food for others. Paul then justifies the question of 1 Corinthians 9:10a, by asserting, and giving the Divine motive for, that which the question clearly implies.

Because in hope etc.: a broad principle which moved God to have Deuteronomy 25:4 written one applicable both to gospel workers and to all who labor to provide food of any kind for others. Hence the change from the first person, because of us, to the third, he who ploughs. Ought: an obligation resting on those for whom he works. It is right that a ploughman's toil be lightened by a prospect of reward.

He who thrashes; ought to do so in hope.

Of partaking: sharing the grain he thrashes out, according to the custom, everywhere prevalent in the early stages of civilization, of payment in kind. But the ploughman ought not to have to wait for this. Hence, of him, the word partake is not used.

Deuteronomy 25:4 is very conspicuous for its unexpected, sudden, and momentary reference to cattle, amid matter quite different. For this there must be some reason more important than the mere well-being of cattle. Indeed, all injunctions of kindness to animals are more for our good than theirs. For he who needlessly hurts them inflicts by doing so a far deeper wound in his own moral nature. Moreover, the very insignificance of a mouthful of corn reveals some deeper motive for these words. The open mouths of the cattle treading out the grain proclaim in plain language the great principle that they who by their toil obtain food for others ought themselves to share it. And, of this principle, the gospel laborer is a special and very conspicuous case. For his remuneration is voluntary; and therefore needs to be supported by some great principle. Therefore, if, as Paul and his readers believed the words of Moses are the voice of God, since whatever God says He says in view of all its future applications, we cannot doubt that He moved Moses to write these words with a definite reference to laborers like Paul.

Notice carefully that these words, spoken and written (Deuteronomy 27:1; 31:9) by Moses, are assumed by Paul, as a matter not open to doubt, to be the voice of God, and to have been written because of us, a purpose far above Moses' thought. This implies that through the lips and pen of Moses' God spoke. See my Romans, Dissertation iii.

V. 9. Doth God-In this direction.

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

Verse 9. Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox] See this largely explained in Clarke’s note on “Deuteronomy 25:4”. 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.

Verses 8-10. Say I these things as a man — Have I only human authority and reasons for what I say? or saith not the law — The revealed will of God; the same? For it is written — Deuteronomy 25:4, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox, &c. — But shalt allow the poor animal to feed while it is labouring for thee, in the midst of food; a circumstance in which its hunger would be peculiarly painful. It is well known, that the people of the East did not thresh their corn as we do; but they pressed out the grain, by causing oxen to tread on the ears, a custom which is still retained in several of the eastern nations. “And, at this day,” as Bengelius observes, “horses tread out the corn in some parts of Germany.” Doth God take care for oxen — Was this precept given merely for their sakes? had he not a further meaning in it? did he not intend to show hereby what equity should be used in rewarding those that labour for us? For our sakes no doubt this is written — Not to oblige us to obey those laws, but to teach us to exercise humanity and equity toward those we employ or deal with. This precept, concerning oxen, being introduced in the law, immediately after precepts enjoining justice and mercy in punishments, it was certainly intended to impress the Israelites with a sense of the obligations of justice and humanity toward rational creatures, as the apostle here affirms. That he that plougheth should plough in hope — Of reaping; and he that thresheth in hope — Should not be disappointed of the fruit of his labour; that is, any one that is employed to work for us, should do it in hope of receiving a meet reward for his pains, whereby he may be encouraged in his work, and should be partaker of his hope — Should afterward receive the reward hoped for. And so ought they who labour faithfully in God’s husbandry.

9. Doth God take care for oxen—This passage we have lately seen quoted in a beautiful sermon on tenderness to brutes (by a “liberal” Christian preacher) as inhuman language. He understands the apostle as affirming, contrary to many beautiful texts of sympathy for the lower creatures, that God has no care for brutes! Darwinism, while it confessedly degrades man, claims to elevate the lower animals and to prompt to mercy toward them—a happy result of error, if real. Sad, if Paul’s Christianity were in this below its level!

Alford thus interprets it: “We must not, as ordinarily, supply monon, only, for oxen, and thus rationalize the sentence. The question imports: ‘In giving this command, are the oxen, or those for whom the law was given, its objects?’ And to such a question there can be but one answer. Every duty of humanity has its ultimate ground, not the mere welfare of the animal concerned, but its welfare in that system of which man is the head, and, therefore man’s welfare. The good done to man’s immortal spirit by acts of humanity and justice infinitely outweighs the mere physical comfort of a brute which perishes.” Our own view is, however, that the question is an argument a fortiori: Cares God for oxen in this law? Much more cares he for men, and for ministers who work like oxen. If the law of compensation includes even the honest labouring cattle, it surely includes us apostles.

Ver. 8.-10. These things: about the shepherd and the vinedresser. Not as a man, i.e. merely asserting a principle current among men, (cp 1 Corinthians 15:32; Galatians 3:15,) does Paul speak; but says that which the Law also says.

Moses: an appeal to the authority of the great Lawgiver; to whose lips the following injunction, taken word for word from Deuteronomy 25:4, LXX., is expressly (Deuteronomy 5:1; 27:1) attributed. It is quoted also, in a similar connection, in 1 Timothy 5:18. It refers to oxen treading out grain with their feet, or dragging over it a threshing machine. Both modes are still common in the east: and the injunction of Moses is observed by both Christians and Mohammedans. See Thompson, Land and Book ch. xxxv.

Is it for the oxen etc.; must be interpreted to mean, not, “does God care for oxen?” but, “was it His care for them that prompted these words.” Altogether: not, “for us only;” but that every letter of Deuteronomy 25:4 was written because of us, viz. for those who labor to provide spiritual food for others. Paul then justifies the question of 1 Corinthians 9:10a, by asserting, and giving the Divine motive for, that which the question clearly implies.

Because in hope etc.: a broad principle which moved God to have Deuteronomy 25:4 written one applicable both to gospel workers and to all who labor to provide food of any kind for others. Hence the change from the first person, because of us, to the third, he who ploughs. Ought: an obligation resting on those for whom he works. It is right that a ploughman's toil be lightened by a prospect of reward.

He who thrashes; ought to do so in hope.

Of partaking: sharing the grain he thrashes out, according to the custom, everywhere prevalent in the early stages of civilization, of payment in kind. But the ploughman ought not to have to wait for this. Hence, of him, the word partake is not used.

Deuteronomy 25:4 is very conspicuous for its unexpected, sudden, and momentary reference to cattle, amid matter quite different. For this there must be some reason more important than the mere well-being of cattle. Indeed, all injunctions of kindness to animals are more for our good than theirs. For he who needlessly hurts them inflicts by doing so a far deeper wound in his own moral nature. Moreover, the very insignificance of a mouthful of corn reveals some deeper motive for these words. The open mouths of the cattle treading out the grain proclaim in plain language the great principle that they who by their toil obtain food for others ought themselves to share it. And, of this principle, the gospel laborer is a special and very conspicuous case. For his remuneration is voluntary; and therefore needs to be supported by some great principle. Therefore, if, as Paul and his readers believed the words of Moses are the voice of God, since whatever God says He says in view of all its future applications, we cannot doubt that He moved Moses to write these words with a definite reference to laborers like Paul.

Notice carefully that these words, spoken and written (Deuteronomy 27:1; 31:9) by Moses, are assumed by Paul, as a matter not open to doubt, to be the voice of God, and to have been written because of us, a purpose far above Moses' thought. This implies that through the lips and pen of Moses' God spoke. See my Romans, Dissertation iii.

V. 10. He who ploweth ought to plow in hope-Of reaping. This seems to be a proverbial expression.

And he that thresheth in hope-Ought not to be disappointed, ought to eat the fruit of his labours. And ought they who labour in God's husbandry. Deuteronomy 25:4

Verse 10. And he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.] Instead of o alown thv elpidov autou metecein, epJ elpidi, many of the best MSS. and versions read the passage thus: o alown epJ elpidi tou metecein. And he who thresheth in hope of partaking. “The words thv elpidov, 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 metecein may be understood after the first epJ elpidi, as well as after the last.” Griesbach has left the words in question out of the text.

Verses 8-10. Say I these things as a man — Have I only human authority and reasons for what I say? or saith not the law — The revealed will of God; the same? For it is written — Deuteronomy 25:4, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox, &c. — But shalt allow the poor animal to feed while it is labouring for thee, in the midst of food; a circumstance in which its hunger would be peculiarly painful. It is well known, that the people of the East did not thresh their corn as we do; but they pressed out the grain, by causing oxen to tread on the ears, a custom which is still retained in several of the eastern nations. “And, at this day,” as Bengelius observes, “horses tread out the corn in some parts of Germany.” Doth God take care for oxen — Was this precept given merely for their sakes? had he not a further meaning in it? did he not intend to show hereby what equity should be used in rewarding those that labour for us? For our sakes no doubt this is written — Not to oblige us to obey those laws, but to teach us to exercise humanity and equity toward those we employ or deal with. This precept, concerning oxen, being introduced in the law, immediately after precepts enjoining justice and mercy in punishments, it was certainly intended to impress the Israelites with a sense of the obligations of justice and humanity toward rational creatures, as the apostle here affirms. That he that plougheth should plough in hope — Of reaping; and he that thresheth in hope — Should not be disappointed of the fruit of his labour; that is, any one that is employed to work for us, should do it in hope of receiving a meet reward for his pains, whereby he may be encouraged in his work, and should be partaker of his hope — Should afterward receive the reward hoped for. And so ought they who labour faithfully in God’s husbandry.

10. Altogether—Pautwv, wholly; not meaning that the law speaks exclusively for men, but completely, and without defect of application. Plougheth—In God’s spiritual husbandry, as appears from the following verse. In hope—Sustained by the Church, the minister is cheered in hope of a blessed result of his labours. Thresheth—Both the earlier and the later labourer in the spiritual field. In hope—Cheered by the same anticipation as the plougher, the thresher should be partaker of his, the plougher’s, hope—namely, the crop.

Ver. 8.-10. These things: about the shepherd and the vinedresser. Not as a man, i.e. merely asserting a principle current among men, (cp 1 Corinthians 15:32; Galatians 3:15,) does Paul speak; but says that which the Law also says.

Moses: an appeal to the authority of the great Lawgiver; to whose lips the following injunction, taken word for word from Deuteronomy 25:4, LXX., is expressly (Deuteronomy 5:1; 27:1) attributed. It is quoted also, in a similar connection, in 1 Timothy 5:18. It refers to oxen treading out grain with their feet, or dragging over it a threshing machine. Both modes are still common in the east: and the injunction of Moses is observed by both Christians and Mohammedans. See Thompson, Land and Book ch. xxxv.

Is it for the oxen etc.; must be interpreted to mean, not, “does God care for oxen?” but, “was it His care for them that prompted these words.” Altogether: not, “for us only;” but that every letter of Deuteronomy 25:4 was written because of us, viz. for those who labor to provide spiritual food for others. Paul then justifies the question of 1 Corinthians 9:10a, by asserting, and giving the Divine motive for, that which the question clearly implies.

Because in hope etc.: a broad principle which moved God to have Deuteronomy 25:4 written one applicable both to gospel workers and to all who labor to provide food of any kind for others. Hence the change from the first person, because of us, to the third, he who ploughs. Ought: an obligation resting on those for whom he works. It is right that a ploughman's toil be lightened by a prospect of reward.

He who thrashes; ought to do so in hope.

Of partaking: sharing the grain he thrashes out, according to the custom, everywhere prevalent in the early stages of civilization, of payment in kind. But the ploughman ought not to have to wait for this. Hence, of him, the word partake is not used.

Deuteronomy 25:4 is very conspicuous for its unexpected, sudden, and momentary reference to cattle, amid matter quite different. For this there must be some reason more important than the mere well-being of cattle. Indeed, all injunctions of kindness to animals are more for our good than theirs. For he who needlessly hurts them inflicts by doing so a far deeper wound in his own moral nature. Moreover, the very insignificance of a mouthful of corn reveals some deeper motive for these words. The open mouths of the cattle treading out the grain proclaim in plain language the great principle that they who by their toil obtain food for others ought themselves to share it. And, of this principle, the gospel laborer is a special and very conspicuous case. For his remuneration is voluntary; and therefore needs to be supported by some great principle. Therefore, if, as Paul and his readers believed the words of Moses are the voice of God, since whatever God says He says in view of all its future applications, we cannot doubt that He moved Moses to write these words with a definite reference to laborers like Paul.

Notice carefully that these words, spoken and written (Deuteronomy 27:1; 31:9) by Moses, are assumed by Paul, as a matter not open to doubt, to be the voice of God, and to have been written because of us, a purpose far above Moses' thought. This implies that through the lips and pen of Moses' God spoke. See my Romans, Dissertation iii.

V. 11. Is it a great matter if we shall reap as much of your carnal things-As is needful for our sustenance? Do you give us things of greater value than those you receive from us?

Verse 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.

Verses 11, 12. If we have sown unto you spiritual things — By our incessant diligence in preaching to you the gospel of the blessed God; is it a great thing — More than we have a right to expect; if we shall reap your carnal things — Namely, as much as is needful for our sustenance? Do you give us things of greater value than those you receive from us? If others — Whether true or false apostles or ministers; be partakers of this power over you — Have a right to be maintained by you; are not we rather — Entitled to it, having first preached the gospel among you, and brought you to the knowledge of the truth, and having laboured much more among you? Nevertheless we have not used this power — Though founded in such evident and various principles of equity; but suffer all things — Every kind of hardship, particularly the fatigues of labour, and the want of needful or convenient support, 1 Corinthians 4:11, 12; lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ — By giving an occasion of cavil or reproach to those who are watchful for opportunities to misrepresent and censure our conduct. “By preaching the gospel free of expense, the apostle rendered it the more acceptable to the Gentiles, and drew them the more readily to hear him. There was another reason also for his demanding no reward for preaching, namely, that in future ages mankind might be sensible that in preaching the gospel, he was not animated by any worldly motive, but merely by a full persuasion of its truth. Foreseeing, therefore, that his disinterestedness would, in all ages, be a strong proof of the truth of the gospel, the apostle gloried in preaching it to all men, without fee or reward.” — Macknight.

11. Carnal things—That is, secular goods.

Ver. 11.-12a. Two more arguments in support of Paul's claim to maintenance.

We: Paul and others such as Timothy and Silvanus, (2 Corinthians 1:1; Acts 18:5,) his fellow-workers at Corinth.

Spiritual, fleshly: same thought in Romans 15:27. A great thing: 2 Corinthians 11:15. The word preached by Paul at Corinth was a seed (Luke 8:11) from which his hearers had reaped a spiritual harvest. Was it then a great recompense if he received from them things needful for the body, which were a far less valuable product of their bodily labor?

Sow, reap: keeping up the metaphor of 1 Corinthians 9:10, and specially appropriate for results corresponding to the organic laws of bodily and spiritual life. Cp. 2 Corinthians 9:6; Galatians 5:22; 6:7ff.

If others etc.: another argument, similar to, but more pointed than, 1 Corinthians 9:6. “Others are already exercising the right (or, authority) over you, the right to maintenance, 1 Corinthians 9:4, 6,) which I claim.” This question reminds us irresistibly of the hostile and false teachers of 2 Corinthians 11:12; with which passage it is an important coincidence. But, to whomever Paul refers, his claim was infinitely superior to theirs.

V. 12. If others-Whether true or false apostles. Partake of this power-Have a right to be maintained. Do not we rather-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.

Verse 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.

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.

Verses 11, 12. If we have sown unto you spiritual things — By our incessant diligence in preaching to you the gospel of the blessed God; is it a great thing — More than we have a right to expect; if we shall reap your carnal things — Namely, as much as is needful for our sustenance? Do you give us things of greater value than those you receive from us? If others — Whether true or false apostles or ministers; be partakers of this power over you — Have a right to be maintained by you; are not we rather — Entitled to it, having first preached the gospel among you, and brought you to the knowledge of the truth, and having laboured much more among you? Nevertheless we have not used this power — Though founded in such evident and various principles of equity; but suffer all things — Every kind of hardship, particularly the fatigues of labour, and the want of needful or convenient support, 1 Corinthians 4:11, 12; lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ — By giving an occasion of cavil or reproach to those who are watchful for opportunities to misrepresent and censure our conduct. “By preaching the gospel free of expense, the apostle rendered it the more acceptable to the Gentiles, and drew them the more readily to hear him. There was another reason also for his demanding no reward for preaching, namely, that in future ages mankind might be sensible that in preaching the gospel, he was not animated by any worldly motive, but merely by a full persuasion of its truth. Foreseeing, therefore, that his disinterestedness would, in all ages, be a strong proof of the truth of the gospel, the apostle gloried in preaching it to all men, without fee or reward.” — Macknight.

12. Others—The parties, for instance, mentioned in verse 5. We—As in verse 6: I only and Barnabas. This power—The right of maintenance by the Church. Hinder—By burdening the poor and subjecting ourselves to the charge of being mercenaries. St. Paul, now rising above the analogical argument for compensation drawn from labourers and oxen, quotes the analogy of the Jewish Levites and priesthood.

Ver. 12b. A forerunner of § 16: cp. 1 Corinthians 9:15,18. Paul has proved his apostleship, and therefore his right to the maintenance enjoyed by other apostles for themselves and their wives. This claim he has supported by an appeal to the common practice of men, to a remarkable passage in the Mosaic Law, to the greater value of the spiritual good his readers have received as compared with any material gifts from them to him, and to the fact that they concede to others what he claims for himself. All this is but a background designed to throw into bold relief his own refusal to use his claim. This refusal he now begins to expound. This right: as in 1 Corinthians 9:12a.

All things: cp. 2 Corinthians 11:7ff; 2 Thessalonians 3:9; Acts 20:34. These words raise the case in point into a universal principle with Paul. He makes it his constant practice to submit to every kind of hardship rather than in any way hinder the Gospel. The progress (2 Thessalonians 3:1) of the Gospel depends very much upon the impression made upon the hearers by the character of the preacher. Now, if Paul had been maintained by his converts, he might have seemed to be merely making a living by his teaching as others did. Whereas his refusal to be paid for teaching claimed attention for the gospel as something new and disinterested. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:7-12. Therefore, had Paul used his right to maintenance, the Word he preached would have lost this moral advantage and would so far have been hindered.

We: cp. 1 Corinthians 9:6. He does not wish us to think that he is alone in this forbearance.

The Gospel of Christ: full emphatic title. He is careful not to hinder the spread of the good news about the long-expected Anointed One. This verse warns us that the life-giving Gospel may be hindered, even by an Apostle, claiming his rights. Therefore, our right to anything is in itself no sufficient reason for claiming it. We are bound by our loyalty to Christ to consider whether we shall most advance His kingdom by claiming or waiving our right.

Verse 13. They which minister about holy things] All the officers about the temple, whether priests, Levites, Nethinim, &c., 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.

Verses 13, 14. Do ye not know, &c. — In further support of the justice of the claim in question, I might remind you of the provision which God made for the priests and Levites under the Mosaic law; that they which minister about holy things — As, 1st, the Levites, who perform the various servile offices relating to the temple service; live — Are supported by; the things of the temple — Have their maintenance, in a great measure, from the offerings, tithes, &c., brought thither; And, 2d, they which wait at the altar — The priests, who are chiefly employed in offering the sacrifices at the altar; are partakers with the altar — Have a portion allotted them of the sacrifices offered upon it. Even so — According to the equity of that law; hath the Lord Christ ordained — Namely, Luke 10:7, 8; Matthew 10:11; that they which preach the gospel should live by the gospel — Should be supported by those to whom they preach it.

Ver. 13. They that wait at the altar, whether priests, levites, or servants, are partakers with the altar of all the fruits, the vows, and offerings of Israel. They not only have support, but liberal support. In like manner, ministers serving churches which are poor, should not be burdensome to them; but when those churches become numerous and rich, the members should abound in liberality to their ministers as God has favoured them with success in commerce and wealth. The rich man who sees his minister unable to pursue his studies for want of books, and want of clothes, or to provide for his children trades, and does not assist him, must give account another day. Who can count the blessings which a congregation receive from an enlightened ministry, or estimate the debt they owe?

13. They which minister—Alluding to the Levites. Wait at the altar— The priests.

Ver. 13.- 14. Two more arguments supporting Paul's claim to maintenance. That they are separated from the former arguments by 1 Corinthians 9:12b and are introduced by the emphatic words do you not know, gives them great prominence.

The sacred-things: the various rites of the temple.

Eat from the sanctuary, or sacred-place: receive maintenance from the temple. A part of most sacrifices was given to the priests for food: Leviticus 6:16, 26; Numbers 18:8-19.

Give attendance at the altar: present themselves to offer sacrifice. Receive portions with etc.: Of peace offerings, a part was consumed on the altar, and a part by the priest. In 1 Corinthians 9:13a we have the priest's work generally; in 1 Corinthians 9:13b, that part of it in which the principle before us is most conspicuous.

In this way also: not only adds to the ordinances of Moses an ordinance of Christ, but strengthens the authority of each by showing that they embody the same principle.

The Lord, Master of His church, ordained: in Matthew 10:9f; Luke 10:7; another mark of agreement of or Gospels with the words of Christ as reported to Paul. Cp. 1 Corinthians 7:10. Live from the Gospel: obtain by preaching it the things needful for bodily life.

This section was primarily designed to be merely a background throwing into bold relief Paul's refusal to be maintained by the church. But the earnestness of his tone, the accumulation of arguments, and hints in 1 Corinthians 9:3, 13, betray the presence of opponents whom Paul wished to confute and abash. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:12. And the general applicability of his many arguments, and especially of 1 Corinthians 9:14, have evident reference to the necessity, foreseen by Paul though possibly not then existing, for paid workers in the church. And doubtless, with a view to this, as well as to the preachers sent forth by Himself personally, the words of Matthew 10:9f; Luke 10:7 were spoken and recorded. Probably the conspicuous feature of the Mosaic ritual mentioned in 1 Corinthians 9:13 was designed with the same purpose. That each church has a right to decide which of its members shall be thus maintained, Paul admits, by presenting in 1 Corinthians 9:1-3 his own credentials. And, by waiving his right to maintenance in order thus more effectively to do Christ's work, Paul set an example of that gratuitous service of the church which is not only a beautiful expression of unselfish devotion but is also one of the most important factors in the progress of Christianity.

V. 14. Matthew 10:10

Verse 14. Even so hath the Lord ordained] This is evidently a reference to our Lord’s ordination, Matthew 10:10: The workman is worthy of his meat. And Luke 10:7: For the labourer 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.

Verses 13, 14. Do ye not know, &c. — In further support of the justice of the claim in question, I might remind you of the provision which God made for the priests and Levites under the Mosaic law; that they which minister about holy things — As, 1st, the Levites, who perform the various servile offices relating to the temple service; live — Are supported by; the things of the temple — Have their maintenance, in a great measure, from the offerings, tithes, &c., brought thither; And, 2d, they which wait at the altar — The priests, who are chiefly employed in offering the sacrifices at the altar; are partakers with the altar — Have a portion allotted them of the sacrifices offered upon it. Even so — According to the equity of that law; hath the Lord Christ ordained — Namely, Luke 10:7, 8; Matthew 10:11; that they which preach the gospel should live by the gospel — Should be supported by those to whom they preach it.

14. Even so—The third and conclusive argument—the command of Christ. Matthew 10:10; Luke 10:7. Another instance indicating, probably, Paul’s acquaintance with the gospels of Matthew and Luke.

3. Reason why Paul renounced his right of Church maintenance— because his glory and pay was a gratis gospel, 15-22.

Ver. 13.- 14. Two more arguments supporting Paul's claim to maintenance. That they are separated from the former arguments by 1 Corinthians 9:12b and are introduced by the emphatic words do you not know, gives them great prominence.

The sacred-things: the various rites of the temple.

Eat from the sanctuary, or sacred-place: receive maintenance from the temple. A part of most sacrifices was given to the priests for food: Leviticus 6:16, 26; Numbers 18:8-19.

Give attendance at the altar: present themselves to offer sacrifice. Receive portions with etc.: Of peace offerings, a part was consumed on the altar, and a part by the priest. In 1 Corinthians 9:13a we have the priest's work generally; in 1 Corinthians 9:13b, that part of it in which the principle before us is most conspicuous.

In this way also: not only adds to the ordinances of Moses an ordinance of Christ, but strengthens the authority of each by showing that they embody the same principle.

The Lord, Master of His church, ordained: in Matthew 10:9f; Luke 10:7; another mark of agreement of or Gospels with the words of Christ as reported to Paul. Cp. 1 Corinthians 7:10. Live from the Gospel: obtain by preaching it the things needful for bodily life.

This section was primarily designed to be merely a background throwing into bold relief Paul's refusal to be maintained by the church. But the earnestness of his tone, the accumulation of arguments, and hints in 1 Corinthians 9:3, 13, betray the presence of opponents whom Paul wished to confute and abash. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:12. And the general applicability of his many arguments, and especially of 1 Corinthians 9:14, have evident reference to the necessity, foreseen by Paul though possibly not then existing, for paid workers in the church. And doubtless, with a view to this, as well as to the preachers sent forth by Himself personally, the words of Matthew 10:9f; Luke 10:7 were spoken and recorded. Probably the conspicuous feature of the Mosaic ritual mentioned in 1 Corinthians 9:13 was designed with the same purpose. That each church has a right to decide which of its members shall be thus maintained, Paul admits, by presenting in 1 Corinthians 9:1-3 his own credentials. And, by waiving his right to maintenance in order thus more effectively to do Christ's work, Paul set an example of that gratuitous service of the church which is not only a beautiful expression of unselfish devotion but is also one of the most important factors in the progress of Christianity.

V. 15. It were better for me to die than-To give occasion to them that seek occasion against me, 2 Corinthians 11:12.

Verse 15. Neither have I written, &c.] 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.

Verses 15-18. But — Though my right to a maintenance, as an apostle, be established by the precepts both of the law and of the gospel; I have used none of those things — During my abode among you, as you well know; neither have I written these things that — If, according to my purpose, I should ever visit you again; it should be so done unto me — But only to teach you how to use your Christian liberty. For it were better for me to die — To suffer the greatest want, even to starving; than that any man should make my glorying — That I have preached the gospel freely; void — By drawing me to require a maintenance. In other words, to give occasion to them that seek occasion against me. For, though I preach the gospel — And that ever so clearly and fully, faithfully and diligently; I have nothing to glory of — Being, after all, but an unprofitable servant, and having done no more than was my duty to do, Luke 17:10; for necessity is laid upon me — By Christ’s appearing to me, and commanding me to preach, and I must either preach it or perish: and to preach it merely to escape damnation, is surely not matter of glorying. Yea, wo is unto me if I preach not the gospel — For me to decline a work assigned me by so condescending an appearance of Christ, when, with the most malicious rage, I was persecuting and endeavouring to destroy his church, would be an instance of ingratitude and obstinacy deserving the most dreadful and insupportable punishment. For if — Or rather, if indeed, I do this thing — Namely, preach the gospel; willingly — Without reluctance, and from an obedient mind. In preaching the gospel willingly, the apostle evidently included his preaching it from such a conviction of its truth and importance, and from such a principle of love to God and regard for his glory, and love to mankind and concern for their salvation, as enabled him to do it with cheerfulness, alacrity, and joy. I have a reward — Prepared for me according to my labour; that is, I shall obtain that distinguished reward, which, in the life to come, will be bestowed on them who turn many to righteousness, and who in that work undergo great hardships. This was Paul’s case, who, in his voyages and journeys among the Jews and Gentiles, exposed himself to innumerable dangers and sufferings, with much bodily fatigue. But if against my will — As I said before; a dispensation is committed unto me — And I must of necessity fulfil it. What then is my reward — What is that circumstance in my conduct for which I expect a peculiar reward from my great Master? — Verily — Surely this; that when I preach I may make the gospel without charge — May communicate it to my hearers free of expense; that I abuse not — To any low and secular purpose; my power in the gospel — Or carry it beyond its due bounds.

Ver. 15. It were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void. Paul as a Hebrew scholar, and as a Roman gentleman, preserved his dignity in the church at Corinth, which at first was weak and poor, as was the case with most of the primitive churches. He assigns another reason for his disinterestedness; he would cut off occasion from the false apostles, who sought occasion. What can we say of a man so illustrious, but that he was covetous of the great reward in heaven.

15. But I—Omitting all others, Paul drops his we and comes down to his own personal I. So done—That I might be maintained by the Church. Better… die… than… glorying void—Since that glorying is the salvation of souls and the honour of Christ.

I CORINTHIANS

SECTION 16 — TO SAVE OTHERS AND HIMSELF,

PAUL REFUSES TO USE HIS CLAIM TO

MAINTENANCE CH. 9:15-27

But, for my part, I have not used any of these. And I have not written these things that it may be so with me. For it were good for me rather to die, or no one shall make vain my ground of exultation. For, if I be preaching the Gospel, it is not to me a ground of exultation. For necessity lies upon me. For woe is there for me if I do not preach the Gospel. For, if of my own will I am doing this, I have a reward: but, if not of my own will, I am entrusted with a stewardship. What then is my reward? That when preaching the Gospel I may make the Gospel without cost, in order not to use to the full my right in the Gospel. For, being free from all, to all I made myself a servant,* (*Or, brought myself under bondage.) that I may gain the more part of them. And I became to the Jews as a Jew, that I may gain Jews; to those under law as under law, (not being myself under law,) that I may gain those under law; to those without law as without law, (not being without law to God but in law to Christ,) that I may gain those without law. I became weak to the weak ones that the weak ones I may gain. To all I am become all things, that in all ways I may save some. And all things I do because of the Gospel that I may become a sharer of it with others. Do you not know that they who run in a racecourse, all indeed run, but one receives the prize? In this way you are running, that you may obtain. And every one that contends at the festal games in all things is self-controlled. They indeed that they may receive a perishable crown, but we an imperishable. I then in this way am running, as not without a definite goal: in this way I box, not as striking air. But I bruise my body, and lead it about as a slave; lest in any way having acted as herald to others, myself be rejected. Paul will now reassert and explain his refusal (1 Corinthians 9:12) to receive a livelihood from the Gospel. He persists in his refusal, as being his only ground of exultation, 1 Corinthians 9:15-18; that he may save others, 1 Corinthians 9:19-23; and thus himself obtain the victor's crown, 1 Corinthians 9:24-27.

Ver. 15. After arguments of general application. Paul turns now to his own conduct.

Not used; takes up the same words in 1 Corinthians 9:12. Any of these: the various advantages implied in “living from the Gospel;” according to the use of the Greek plural.

That thus etc.: that I may receive maintenance from the Gospel. For it were good etc.: reason for I have not written etc.

Or no one etc.: the only alternative. Either he will retain in its fullness his ground-of-exultation (see under 1 Corinthians 1:29) or he prefers to die. His refusal to receive a livelihood from the Gospel was to him a source of joy and of spiritual elevation: and he is resolved that this source of joy no one shall reduce to an empty thing by persuading him to be paid for his work. Cp. 2 Corinthians 11:10.

Verse 16. For though I preach the Gospel] I have cause of glorying that I preach the Gospel free of all charges to you; but I cannot glory in being a preacher of the Gospel, because I am not such either by my own skill or power. I have received both the office, and the grace by which I execute the office, from God. I have not only his authority to preach, but that authority obliges me to preach; and if I did not, I should endanger my salvation: yea, wo is unto me, if I preach not the Gospel. As every genuine preacher receives his commission from God alone, it is God alone who can take it away. Wo to that man who runs when God has not sent him; and wo to him who refuses to run, or who ceases to run, when God has sent him.

Verses 15-18. But — Though my right to a maintenance, as an apostle, be established by the precepts both of the law and of the gospel; I have used none of those things — During my abode among you, as you well know; neither have I written these things that — If, according to my purpose, I should ever visit you again; it should be so done unto me — But only to teach you how to use your Christian liberty. For it were better for me to die — To suffer the greatest want, even to starving; than that any man should make my glorying — That I have preached the gospel freely; void — By drawing me to require a maintenance. In other words, to give occasion to them that seek occasion against me. For, though I preach the gospel — And that ever so clearly and fully, faithfully and diligently; I have nothing to glory of — Being, after all, but an unprofitable servant, and having done no more than was my duty to do, Luke 17:10; for necessity is laid upon me — By Christ’s appearing to me, and commanding me to preach, and I must either preach it or perish: and to preach it merely to escape damnation, is surely not matter of glorying. Yea, wo is unto me if I preach not the gospel — For me to decline a work assigned me by so condescending an appearance of Christ, when, with the most malicious rage, I was persecuting and endeavouring to destroy his church, would be an instance of ingratitude and obstinacy deserving the most dreadful and insupportable punishment. For if — Or rather, if indeed, I do this thing — Namely, preach the gospel; willingly — Without reluctance, and from an obedient mind. In preaching the gospel willingly, the apostle evidently included his preaching it from such a conviction of its truth and importance, and from such a principle of love to God and regard for his glory, and love to mankind and concern for their salvation, as enabled him to do it with cheerfulness, alacrity, and joy. I have a reward — Prepared for me according to my labour; that is, I shall obtain that distinguished reward, which, in the life to come, will be bestowed on them who turn many to righteousness, and who in that work undergo great hardships. This was Paul’s case, who, in his voyages and journeys among the Jews and Gentiles, exposed himself to innumerable dangers and sufferings, with much bodily fatigue. But if against my will — As I said before; a dispensation is committed unto me — And I must of necessity fulfil it. What then is my reward — What is that circumstance in my conduct for which I expect a peculiar reward from my great Master? — Verily — Surely this; that when I preach I may make the gospel without charge — May communicate it to my hearers free of expense; that I abuse not — To any low and secular purpose; my power in the gospel — Or carry it beyond its due bounds.

16. For necessity… woe—A divine requisition, enforced by a penalty of woe, obligated him to preach the gospel. But this was upon the level plane of absolute duty, while his holy ambition aspired to a Christian glory from higher self-denial and emprise. Barely to escape the woe did not suffice.

Ver. 16.-17. Reason for this steadfast purpose, viz. that this is Paul's only ground of exultation. For, that he merely preached the Gospel is no ground of special inward elevation and joy.

For necessity etc.: proof of this.

For woe etc.; explains the necessity which compels him to preach. Woe: calamity, in this case, eternal death. So explicit and solemn was Christ's commission that Paul could not retain His favor if he refused to obey it. 1 Corinthians 9:17 shows how this impending woe, and the necessity it laid on Paul, make the mere fact of his preaching no ground of exultation.

Reward: as in 1 Corinthians 3:8, 14: not necessarily eternal life (which is God's free gift to all who believe,) but the special reward to be given to all who have done work for Christ.

Have a reward: Matthew 6:1; Luke 6:23.

Stewardship: cp. 1 Corinthians 4:1. If in preaching the Gospel Paul had acted of his own prompting, and without the necessity of 1 Corinthians 9:16, his preaching would have moral worth, (a worth, however, wrought in him by God's free undeserved favor,) and would be followed by reward in the great Day. But the compulsion under which he preaches, i.e. the woe which awaits him if he do not preach, deprives it of moral worth, and places him in the position of one (with the Greeks, usually a slave) to whom his master has entrusted the oversight of an establishment, and who under pain of punishment disposes properly of goods committed to his charge. Cp. Luke 17:10. Consequently, Paul's preaching is to him no ground of exultation, whereas it would be if it had the moral worth which God will reward.

V. 17. Willingly-He seems to mean, without receiving anything. St. Paul here speaks in a manner peculiar to himself. Another might have preached willingly, and yet have received a maintenance from the Corinthians. But if he had received anything from them, he would have termed it preaching unwillingly. And so, in the next verse, another might have used that power without abusing it. But his own using it at all, he would have termed abusing it.

A dispensation is intrusted to me-Therefore I dare not refrain.

Verse 17. For if I do this thing willingly] If I be a cordial co-operator with God, I have a reward, an incorruptible crown, 1 Corinthians 9:25. Or, if I freely preach this Gospel without being burthensome to any, I have a special reward; but if I do not, I have simply an office to fulfil, into which God has put me, and may fulfil it conscientiously, and claim my privileges at the same time; but then I lose that special reward which I have in view by preaching the Gospel without charge to any.

This and the 18th verse have been variously translated: Sir Norton Knatchhull and, after him, Mr. Wakefield translate the two passages thus: For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if I am intrusted with an office without my consent? what is my reward then? to make the Gospel of Christ, whilst I preach it, without charge, in not using to the utmost my privileges in the Gospel.

Others render the passage thus: But if I do it merely because I am obliged to it, I only discharge an office that is committed to me, 1 Corinthians 9:18. For what then shall I be rewarded? It is for this, that, preaching the Gospel of Christ, I preach it freely, and do not insist on a claim which the Gospel itself gives me.

Verses 15-18. But — Though my right to a maintenance, as an apostle, be established by the precepts both of the law and of the gospel; I have used none of those things — During my abode among you, as you well know; neither have I written these things that — If, according to my purpose, I should ever visit you again; it should be so done unto me — But only to teach you how to use your Christian liberty. For it were better for me to die — To suffer the greatest want, even to starving; than that any man should make my glorying — That I have preached the gospel freely; void — By drawing me to require a maintenance. In other words, to give occasion to them that seek occasion against me. For, though I preach the gospel — And that ever so clearly and fully, faithfully and diligently; I have nothing to glory of — Being, after all, but an unprofitable servant, and having done no more than was my duty to do, Luke 17:10; for necessity is laid upon me — By Christ’s appearing to me, and commanding me to preach, and I must either preach it or perish: and to preach it merely to escape damnation, is surely not matter of glorying. Yea, wo is unto me if I preach not the gospel — For me to decline a work assigned me by so condescending an appearance of Christ, when, with the most malicious rage, I was persecuting and endeavouring to destroy his church, would be an instance of ingratitude and obstinacy deserving the most dreadful and insupportable punishment. For if — Or rather, if indeed, I do this thing — Namely, preach the gospel; willingly — Without reluctance, and from an obedient mind. In preaching the gospel willingly, the apostle evidently included his preaching it from such a conviction of its truth and importance, and from such a principle of love to God and regard for his glory, and love to mankind and concern for their salvation, as enabled him to do it with cheerfulness, alacrity, and joy. I have a reward — Prepared for me according to my labour; that is, I shall obtain that distinguished reward, which, in the life to come, will be bestowed on them who turn many to righteousness, and who in that work undergo great hardships. This was Paul’s case, who, in his voyages and journeys among the Jews and Gentiles, exposed himself to innumerable dangers and sufferings, with much bodily fatigue. But if against my will — As I said before; a dispensation is committed unto me — And I must of necessity fulfil it. What then is my reward — What is that circumstance in my conduct for which I expect a peculiar reward from my great Master? — Verily — Surely this; that when I preach I may make the gospel without charge — May communicate it to my hearers free of expense; that I abuse not — To any low and secular purpose; my power in the gospel — Or carry it beyond its due bounds.

17. For—Literally translated—For if willing I do this, I have a reward; if unwilling, with a stewardship am I intrusted.

By willing, here, is meant a willingness not enforced by the necessity and the woe, but free and enterprising, ready to sacrifice rights and perquisites. By unwilling, is meant a reluctant and obligated consent from fear of penalty. A reward—For the heartiness and the sacrifices resulting. A dispensation—A stewardship; an obligation sustained by penalty to discharge the sacred office remains, with a correspondent low blessing upon him.

Ver. 16.-17. Reason for this steadfast purpose, viz. that this is Paul's only ground of exultation. For, that he merely preached the Gospel is no ground of special inward elevation and joy.

For necessity etc.: proof of this.

For woe etc.; explains the necessity which compels him to preach. Woe: calamity, in this case, eternal death. So explicit and solemn was Christ's commission that Paul could not retain His favor if he refused to obey it. 1 Corinthians 9:17 shows how this impending woe, and the necessity it laid on Paul, make the mere fact of his preaching no ground of exultation.

Reward: as in 1 Corinthians 3:8, 14: not necessarily eternal life (which is God's free gift to all who believe,) but the special reward to be given to all who have done work for Christ.

Have a reward: Matthew 6:1; Luke 6:23.

Stewardship: cp. 1 Corinthians 4:1. If in preaching the Gospel Paul had acted of his own prompting, and without the necessity of 1 Corinthians 9:16, his preaching would have moral worth, (a worth, however, wrought in him by God's free undeserved favor,) and would be followed by reward in the great Day. But the compulsion under which he preaches, i.e. the woe which awaits him if he do not preach, deprives it of moral worth, and places him in the position of one (with the Greeks, usually a slave) to whom his master has entrusted the oversight of an establishment, and who under pain of punishment disposes properly of goods committed to his charge. Cp. Luke 17:10. Consequently, Paul's preaching is to him no ground of exultation, whereas it would be if it had the moral worth which God will reward.

V. 18. What then is my reward-That circumstance in my conduct for which I expect a peculiar reward from my great Master? That I abuse not-Make not an unseasonable use of my power which I have in preaching the gospel.

Verse 18. That I abuse not my power] I am inclined to think that katacrhsasqai is to be understood here, not in the sense of abusing, but of using to the uttermost-exacting every thing that a man can claim by law. How many proofs have we of this in preachers of different denominations, who insist so strongly and so frequently on their privileges, as they term them, that the people are tempted to believe they seek not their souls’ interests, but their secular goods. Such preachers can do the people no good. But the people who are most liable to think thus of their ministers, are those who are unwilling to grant the common necessaries of life to those who watch over them in the Lord. For there are such people even in the Christian Church! If the preachers of the Gospel were as parsimonious of the bread of life as some congregations and Christian societies are of the bread that perisheth, and if the preacher gave them a spiritual nourishment as base, as mean, and as scanty as the temporal support which they afford him, their souls must without doubt have nearly a famine of the bread of life.

Verses 15-18. But — Though my right to a maintenance, as an apostle, be established by the precepts both of the law and of the gospel; I have used none of those things — During my abode among you, as you well know; neither have I written these things that — If, according to my purpose, I should ever visit you again; it should be so done unto me — But only to teach you how to use your Christian liberty. For it were better for me to die — To suffer the greatest want, even to starving; than that any man should make my glorying — That I have preached the gospel freely; void — By drawing me to require a maintenance. In other words, to give occasion to them that seek occasion against me. For, though I preach the gospel — And that ever so clearly and fully, faithfully and diligently; I have nothing to glory of — Being, after all, but an unprofitable servant, and having done no more than was my duty to do, Luke 17:10; for necessity is laid upon me — By Christ’s appearing to me, and commanding me to preach, and I must either preach it or perish: and to preach it merely to escape damnation, is surely not matter of glorying. Yea, wo is unto me if I preach not the gospel — For me to decline a work assigned me by so condescending an appearance of Christ, when, with the most malicious rage, I was persecuting and endeavouring to destroy his church, would be an instance of ingratitude and obstinacy deserving the most dreadful and insupportable punishment. For if — Or rather, if indeed, I do this thing — Namely, preach the gospel; willingly — Without reluctance, and from an obedient mind. In preaching the gospel willingly, the apostle evidently included his preaching it from such a conviction of its truth and importance, and from such a principle of love to God and regard for his glory, and love to mankind and concern for their salvation, as enabled him to do it with cheerfulness, alacrity, and joy. I have a reward — Prepared for me according to my labour; that is, I shall obtain that distinguished reward, which, in the life to come, will be bestowed on them who turn many to righteousness, and who in that work undergo great hardships. This was Paul’s case, who, in his voyages and journeys among the Jews and Gentiles, exposed himself to innumerable dangers and sufferings, with much bodily fatigue. But if against my will — As I said before; a dispensation is committed unto me — And I must of necessity fulfil it. What then is my reward — What is that circumstance in my conduct for which I expect a peculiar reward from my great Master? — Verily — Surely this; that when I preach I may make the gospel without charge — May communicate it to my hearers free of expense; that I abuse not — To any low and secular purpose; my power in the gospel — Or carry it beyond its due bounds.

Ver. 18. That I abuse not: katacrhsasqai, I use not my power. That is, says Tirinus, minus bene uti; less or not fully use my power to live by the gospel.

18. What… reward—Of this eager and self-sacrificing willingness, at the expense of a livelihood, what is my reward? The answer to this question is not, as Stanley and others give it, “My reward is, that I have no reward!” By no means. His reward is a gratis gospel to the people, with all the blessedness embraced in that glorious fact. His service is willingness for any sacrifice; his reward, his glory, dearer than life itself, is that unpaid yet priceless gospel. If Paul’s commentators cannot see that this is a reward, he could see it to be so; a reward pregnant with salvation to unnumbered souls, and with the richest blessings of his divine Master on his own soul. This view is confirmed by the entire following context, 19-22; where he declares that for various self-abnegations, the reward is that he might gain more, save some. An earnest will is the antecedent; the gospel’s rich success is the consequent reward. Not that he fails to include in this reward all the resultant blessedness to others and himself. Such inclusion is proved 23-27, where he claims, as in the result, the being partaker with you, the final prize an incorruptible crown. It is in the vigorous faith of the apostle to lump all the glory of this eternal future in the present and the future immediate. Make the gospel… without charge—Literally, I may present an expenseless gospel. Such an attainment Paul holds to be a glory and a reward. That—To the end, or result, that. He makes the gospel expenseless, terminating in the fact that he has underused his power in the gospel.

In full accordance with the magnanimity with which St. Paul renounced pecuniary support did he also renounce his own preferences, tastes, and conveniences, in order that by conceding to others he might win them to Christ. That in this accommodation he never surrrendered the right and the true, he does not consider it necessary to say. That might be assumed as of course. The history of his own conduct on that point, as given by Luke, is a better statement of his most delicate discrimination on this point than any profession of his own. Note on Acts 15:6; 21:24.

Ver. 18. What then etc.? “Since the threatened woe deprives the mere fact of my preaching of all merit, what service remains to me which God will reward? Am I shut out from the reward of 1 Corinthians 3:8, 14?” This question must have a positive answer. For, evidently, Paul is not shut out from such reward. And the answer must be sought for, and is found, in that when preaching etc. That Paul of his own prompting refuses to use the privilege of maintenance given to him by Christ, is meritorious and will receive reward. His refusal to use-to-the-full, while preaching-the-Gospel, the right to maintenance, involving as it did much extra toil and prompted by a belief (1 Corinthians 9:12) that he would thus help forward the Gospel, was acceptable to God and will be followed by reward. This answer to the question is put in the form of a purpose: because the conduct which God will reward is a steadfast purpose directing Paul's conduct.

This verse implies that to preach the Gospel without pay was Paul's usual practice. Cp. 2 Thessalonians 3:8f; Acts 20:34. And the wisdom of it is evident. He wished to make church finances as simple as possible, and to discourage the idle people (cp. 2 Thessalonians 3:10ff) who are ever ready to make gain of the piety of others. But Paul accepted (2 Corinthians 11:8f: Philippians 4:16) gifts from churches at a distance. For such offerings were a noble mark of Christian character, were little liable to abuse and to accept them had no appearance of self-seeking. Notice that certain actions will receive reward because of their spontaneousness; and that this is evidently looked upon here as meriting reward. But all our good actions are God's work in us and gift to us. Even when they spring from our own free choice they are really a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22) given to us by God. But they are none the less good actions: and God graciously recognizes His work in us as meriting reward.

Notice Paul's wish to do something beyond that made almost compulsory by his circumstances and by Christ's definite command. Much that is right loses its value and moral influence because other reasons besides loyalty to Christ move us to do it. The true test of fidelity is our conduct when we have no definite command and when we can do otherwise without serious and evident consequences. We may well be eager to do that for which there can be no conceivable motive except devotion to our Master. We learn here that our own actions may be a ground of spiritual exultation. When we find ourselves actuated by motives which once were foreign to us but which our best judgment commends, and doing work which is evidently Christ's work in us and a precursor of eternal reward, we are filled with a gratitude, joy, and confidence, which are truly an “exultation in the Lord,” 1 Corinthians 1:31.

V. 19. I made myself the servant of all-I acted with as self-denying a regard to their interest, and as much caution not to offend them, as if I had been literally their servant or slave. Where is the preacher of the gospel who treads in the same steps?

Verse 19. For though I be free] 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 the public.

Verse 19. For though I be free from all men — Not bound to do that which seems unlawful, inconvenient, or disadvantageous to myself, to please any man; yet have I made myself a servant unto all — Addicting myself to the most fatiguing duties, that I might advance their happiness; or complying with the persuasions and inclinations of others in things indifferent. The original expression, emauton edoulwsa, is literally, I have enslaved myself to all; an expression peculiarly beautiful and proper as used here by the apostle. “Slaves wrought for their masters without hire, and were careful to comply with their humours. And the apostle, while preaching the gospel, reduced himself to the condition of a slave, both by serving all men without hire, nay, without requiring a maintenance from them, and by complying with their prejudices in all cases wherein he could do it without sin.” In other words, he acted with as self-denying a regard to their interests, and as much caution not to offend them, as if he had been absolutely in their power, as a slave is in that of his master. Where is the preacher of the gospel who treads in the same steps? That I might gain the more — To true religion and salvation; in which, as he might have added, I have found a noble equivalent for all I could do or bear. By the word kerdhsw, translated I might gain, the apostle intimates, that his converting men to Christ was a part of the gain or hire, which he proposed to obtain by preaching the gospel.

19. Free… made myself servant—Greek, emauton edoulwsa. Free from all, I have enslaved myself to all, is his terse, antithetic language. It presents his independence of soul and body by nature; the enslavement of both to all by grace. Yet in that very enslavement he finds a dignity, a reward, a glory. Gain the more—A prize above all other earthly gain. To submit to the whim and caprice of others is a hard trial to the flesh and spirit. It reduces a high-spirited man from a freeman to a slave. If done for self-interest, it is a sordid debasement. If so done as to sacrifice truth and righteousness it is a crime. If by such conformity we confirm a caprice, a falsity, a superstition, it is an error and a danger. But if done for a high moral purpose, with careful limitations for rectitude, with the aim of delivering from falsity and superstition, then it is a high attainment, worthy the chief of the apostles. This is a renunciation of self, not of a mere mystic kind, or that shows itself in self-mortifications or self-flagellations, but in renouncing self-gratification for human good. It is thus that Paul, Luther, and Wesley have become the objects of reverence to mankind.

Ver. 19. Reason, in addition to those of 1 Corinthians 9:15ff, for the conduct described in 1 Corinthians 9:18.

Free; takes up 1 Corinthians 9:1, and thus marks a transition from Paul's specific refusal of maintenance to his conduct generally. Free from all: from any one who can compel him to do this or that. Servant: or slave: see Romans 1:1.

Made myself servant: cp. Galatians 5:13. He submitted to restriction, toil, privation, for their benefit.

May gain: explained in 1 Corinthians 9:22. To “save” his soul, is to gain him as an eternal Crown of rejoicing: 1 Thessalonians 2:19f; Philippians 4:1. Cp. Matthew 18:15, Philemon 1:15. Paul reminds us that he will gain by his voluntary service.

The more part: as in 1 Corinthians 10:5; 15:6; Acts 19:32; 27:12. It suggests a sad conviction that in some cases Paul's self-denial would be in vain.

V. 20. To the Jews I became as a Jew-Conforming myself in all things to their manner of thinking and living, so far as; I could with innocence. To them that are under the law-Who apprehend themselves to be still bound by the Mosaic law.

As under the law-Observing it myself, while I am among them. Not that he declared this to be necessary, or refused to converse with those who did not observe it. This was the very thing which he condemned in St. Peter, Galatians 2:14.

Verse 20. Unto the Jews I became as a Jew] In Acts 16:3, we find that for the sake of the unconverted Jews he circumcised Timothy. See the note there.

To them that are under the law] To those who considered themselves still under obligation to observe its rites and ceremonies, though they had in the main embraced the Gospel, he became as if under the same obligations; and therefore purified himself in the temple, as we find related, Acts 21:26, where also see the notes.

After the first clause, to them that are under the law as under the law, the following words, mhwn autov upo nomon, not being myself under the law, are added by ABCDEFG, several others; the later Syriac, Sahidic, Armenian, Vulgate, and all the Itala; Cyril, Chrysostom, Damascenus, and others; and on this evidence Griesbach has received them into the text.

Verses 20-23. To the Jews I became as a Jew — Conforming myself in all things to their manner of living, so far as I could with innocence. And, inasmuch as in the preceding chapter the apostle directed the Corinthians to comply with the prejudices of their weak brethren, in the affair of meats sacrificed to idols, and declared his own resolution, that if his eating meat occasioned others to sin, he would not eat flesh while he lived; it is therefore probable that his becoming to the Jews as a Jew, implied especially that he observed the distinction of meats enjoined by Moses, while he lived with the Jews in the heathen countries. It may refer also to his circumcising Timothy, to render his preaching acceptable to the Jews. This compliance with the prejudices of the weak he showed only to gain their good-will, and thereby remove their prejudices against himself, and the cause in which he was engaged. For when the Judaizing teachers insisted on the observance of any of the rites of the law, as necessary to salvation, he always resolutely withstood them, as in the case of Titus, Galatians 2:3, 5, 14. To them that are under the law — Who apprehend themselves to be still bound by the Mosaic law; as under the law — Observing it myself while I am among them. As, however, he did not believe the observance of it to be necessary under the gospel, so he did not refuse to converse with those who omitted to observe it; the very thing which he condemned in Peter, Galatians 2:14. To them that are without law — The Gentiles, who did not hold themselves bound to observe Moses’s law; as without law — Neglecting its ceremonies; being not without law to God — But as much as ever obliged to obey its moral precepts; and under the law to Christ — Under an indispensable obligation in duty and gratitude to obey his will in all things, imitate his example, and live to his glory: and in this sense all Christians will be under the law for ever. That I might gain them that are without the law — Might make my ministry more agreeable and useful to such as were Gentiles by birth and education. To the weak — In knowledge, grace, or abilities, or to those whose consciences were uninformed, and therefore scrupulous; I became as weak — I condescended to their weakness by teaching them according to their capacity, 1 Corinthians 3:1, 2; bearing with their infirmities, and complying with them in forbearing the use of those things which they, through weakness, scrupled to use. I am made — I became; all things to all men — I accommodated myself to all persons in all indifferent things, as far as I could consistently with truth and sincerity; that I might by all means — Or, if possible; save some — How few soever the number might be. And this I do for the gospel’s sake — To promote its success to the utmost of my ability; that I might be partaker thereof with you — That in consequence of the faithful discharge of my office, I might retain the divine favour and approbation, and be a sharer with you in all its privileges and blessings, in time and in eternity.

20. Became as a Jew—Not became a Jew. In circumcising Timothy Paul became as a Jew; in refusing to circumcise Titus he refused to become a Jew. Them that are under the law—But not born Jews; namely, the proselytes to Judaism. His adjustment to these “he proved by non-observance of the law, by the rejection of circumcision, by intercourse with the Gentiles, or by accommodation to their language and arguments, as in Acts 14:16, 17; 17:28; 1 Corinthians 8:1-7; 9:24-27.”— Stanley.

Ver. 20.-22a. Expounds in detail “I made myself to all:” 1 Corinthians 9:22b restates Paul's purpose, “that I may gain the more part.” As a Jew: observing among Jews the Mosaic ordinances of food and feasts. An important coincidence with Acts 21:26; 16:3. But Galatians 2:14 proves that even among Jews he did not pretend to share Jewish repugnance to Gentiles.

I became: by my own purpose and conduct. For, though born a Jew he had, by his conversion, been set free (Galatians 3:28; 5:1) from Jewish restrictions.

Those under law: Romans 6:14f; Galatians 4:4f, 21; 5:18: Jews, looked at from an inward and spiritual, not an outward and national, point of view. The Law is, to those who accept it as the only way to God, a ruling power under which they lie powerless and condemned. And by submitting to the restrictions of the Law Paul put himself in some measure by their side.

Not under law: no longer looking up to it as a master: cp. Romans 6:14, explained Romans 7:1-6; Galatians 5:18. For he knows that, instead of God's gifts being obtained by obedience to law, both obedience and its rewards are God's free gifts to those who believe. To those without-law: as in Romans 2:12, 14.

As without-law: not observing, among Gentiles, Mosaic restrictions. Not without-law of God: not without commands of God which I obey. In-the-law of Christ; expounds the foregoing. Although the commands of God are no longer a rule and a burden under which he lies, yet the commands of Christ (Galatians 6:2, cp. Matthew 22:37ff) are a directing element in which he walks. Cp. Romans 8:2; Hebrews 8:10. These words remind us that Christian liberty is ours only so long as we abide in the will of Christ.

I became weak: 2 Corinthians 11:29; see Romans 15:1. Because they were unable to grasp the full practical bearing of the Gospel, and lest his example should lead them to do that which would injure them Paul imposed limitations (e.g. 1 Corinthians 8:13) upon himself; and thus, in sympathy and practice, shared their weakness. This last detail of conduct brings before us 1 Corinthians 8:7-13, the specific matter of DIV. IV. It refers to believers: 1 Corinthians 9:20, 21 include, and refer chiefly to, unbelievers. These latter Paul sought to gain by leading them to Christ and thus to heaven; those of 1 Corinthians 9:22, by saving them from falling, and thus saving them for ever.

To all: broad statement of principle, parallel with 1 Corinthians 9:19 and 1 Corinthians 9:12b.

V. 21. To them that are without the law-The heathens. As without the law-Neglecting its ceremonies.

Being not without the law to God-But as much as ever under its moral precepts.

Under the law to Christ-And in this sense all Christians will be under the law for ever.

Verse 21. To them that are without law] The Gentiles, who had no written law, though they had the law written in their hearts; see Clarke on “Romans 2:15”.

Being not without law to God] Instead of qew, TO God, and cristw, TO Christ, the most important MSS. and versions have qeou, OF God, and cristou, OF Christ; being not without the law of God, but under the law of Christ.

Them that are without law.] Dr. Lightfoot thinks the Sadducees may be meant, and that in certain cases, as far as the rites and ceremonies of the Jewish religion were concerned, he might conform himself to them, not observing such rites and ceremonies, as it is well known that they disregarded them; for the doctor cannot see how the apostle could conform himself in any thing to them that were without law, i.e. the heathen. But, 1. It is not likely that the apostle could conform himself to the Sadducees; for what success could he expect among a people who denied the resurrection, and consequently a future world, a day of judgment, and all rewards and punishments? 2. He might among the heathen appear as if he were not a Jew, and discourse with them on the great principles of that eternal law, the outlines of which had been written in their hearts, in order to show them the necessity of embracing that Gospel which was the power of God unto salvation to every one that believed.

Verses 20-23. To the Jews I became as a Jew — Conforming myself in all things to their manner of living, so far as I could with innocence. And, inasmuch as in the preceding chapter the apostle directed the Corinthians to comply with the prejudices of their weak brethren, in the affair of meats sacrificed to idols, and declared his own resolution, that if his eating meat occasioned others to sin, he would not eat flesh while he lived; it is therefore probable that his becoming to the Jews as a Jew, implied especially that he observed the distinction of meats enjoined by Moses, while he lived with the Jews in the heathen countries. It may refer also to his circumcising Timothy, to render his preaching acceptable to the Jews. This compliance with the prejudices of the weak he showed only to gain their good-will, and thereby remove their prejudices against himself, and the cause in which he was engaged. For when the Judaizing teachers insisted on the observance of any of the rites of the law, as necessary to salvation, he always resolutely withstood them, as in the case of Titus, Galatians 2:3, 5, 14. To them that are under the law — Who apprehend themselves to be still bound by the Mosaic law; as under the law — Observing it myself while I am among them. As, however, he did not believe the observance of it to be necessary under the gospel, so he did not refuse to converse with those who omitted to observe it; the very thing which he condemned in Peter, Galatians 2:14. To them that are without law — The Gentiles, who did not hold themselves bound to observe Moses’s law; as without law — Neglecting its ceremonies; being not without law to God — But as much as ever obliged to obey its moral precepts; and under the law to Christ — Under an indispensable obligation in duty and gratitude to obey his will in all things, imitate his example, and live to his glory: and in this sense all Christians will be under the law for ever. That I might gain them that are without the law — Might make my ministry more agreeable and useful to such as were Gentiles by birth and education. To the weak — In knowledge, grace, or abilities, or to those whose consciences were uninformed, and therefore scrupulous; I became as weak — I condescended to their weakness by teaching them according to their capacity, 1 Corinthians 3:1, 2; bearing with their infirmities, and complying with them in forbearing the use of those things which they, through weakness, scrupled to use. I am made — I became; all things to all men — I accommodated myself to all persons in all indifferent things, as far as I could consistently with truth and sincerity; that I might by all means — Or, if possible; save some — How few soever the number might be. And this I do for the gospel’s sake — To promote its success to the utmost of my ability; that I might be partaker thereof with you — That in consequence of the faithful discharge of my office, I might retain the divine favour and approbation, and be a sharer with you in all its privileges and blessings, in time and in eternity.

21. Them… without law—Gentiles. Note on Romans 2:14. Not without law—For the being as a thing is not being the thing itself. Paul defines his position as showing that the gospel emancipation from law is still submission to the law of Christ. Paul, as Bengel says, is neither lawless nor anti-law.

Ver. 20.-22a. Expounds in detail “I made myself to all:” 1 Corinthians 9:22b restates Paul's purpose, “that I may gain the more part.” As a Jew: observing among Jews the Mosaic ordinances of food and feasts. An important coincidence with Acts 21:26; 16:3. But Galatians 2:14 proves that even among Jews he did not pretend to share Jewish repugnance to Gentiles.

I became: by my own purpose and conduct. For, though born a Jew he had, by his conversion, been set free (Galatians 3:28; 5:1) from Jewish restrictions.

Those under law: Romans 6:14f; Galatians 4:4f, 21; 5:18: Jews, looked at from an inward and spiritual, not an outward and national, point of view. The Law is, to those who accept it as the only way to God, a ruling power under which they lie powerless and condemned. And by submitting to the restrictions of the Law Paul put himself in some measure by their side.

Not under law: no longer looking up to it as a master: cp. Romans 6:14, explained Romans 7:1-6; Galatians 5:18. For he knows that, instead of God's gifts being obtained by obedience to law, both obedience and its rewards are God's free gifts to those who believe. To those without-law: as in Romans 2:12, 14.

As without-law: not observing, among Gentiles, Mosaic restrictions. Not without-law of God: not without commands of God which I obey. In-the-law of Christ; expounds the foregoing. Although the commands of God are no longer a rule and a burden under which he lies, yet the commands of Christ (Galatians 6:2, cp. Matthew 22:37ff) are a directing element in which he walks. Cp. Romans 8:2; Hebrews 8:10. These words remind us that Christian liberty is ours only so long as we abide in the will of Christ.

I became weak: 2 Corinthians 11:29; see Romans 15:1. Because they were unable to grasp the full practical bearing of the Gospel, and lest his example should lead them to do that which would injure them Paul imposed limitations (e.g. 1 Corinthians 8:13) upon himself; and thus, in sympathy and practice, shared their weakness. This last detail of conduct brings before us 1 Corinthians 8:7-13, the specific matter of DIV. IV. It refers to believers: 1 Corinthians 9:20, 21 include, and refer chiefly to, unbelievers. These latter Paul sought to gain by leading them to Christ and thus to heaven; those of 1 Corinthians 9:22, by saving them from falling, and thus saving them for ever.

To all: broad statement of principle, parallel with 1 Corinthians 9:19 and 1 Corinthians 9:12b.

V. 22. I became as weak-As if I had been scrupulous too. I became all things to all men-Accommodating myself to all, so far as I could consistent with truth and sincerity.

Verse 22. To the weak became I as weak] Those who were

conscientiously scrupulous, even in respect to lawful things. I am made all things to all men] I assumed every shape and form consistent with innocency and perfect integrity; giving up my own will, my own way, my own ease, my own pleasure, and my own profit, that I might save the souls of all. Let those who plead for the system of accommodation on the example of St. Paul, attend to the end he had in view, and the manner in which he pursued that end. It was not to get money, influence, or honour, but to save SOULS! It was not to get ease but to increase his labours. It was not to save his life, but rather that it should be a sacrifice for the good of immortal souls!

A parallel saying to this of St. Paul has been quoted from Achilles Tatius, lib. v., cap. xix., where Clitophon says, on having received a letter from Leucippe: toutoiv entucwn pantaeginomhn omou, aneflegomhn, wcriwn, eqaumazon, hpistoun, ecatron, hcqomhn. “When I read the contents, I became all things at once; I was inflamed, I grew pale, I was struck with wonder; I doubted, I rejoiced, became sad.” The same form of speech is frequent among Greek writers. I think this casts some light on the apostle’s meaning.

That I might by all means save some.] On this clause there are some very important readings found in the MSS. and versions. Instead of pantwv tinav swsw, that I might by all means save some; pantav swsw, that I might save all, is the reading of DEFG, Syriac, Vulgate, Æthiopic, all the Itala, and several of the fathers. This reading Bishop Pearce prefers, because it is more agreeable to St. Paul’s meaning here, and exactly agrees with what he says, 1 Corinthians 10:33, and makes his design more extensive and noble. Wakefield also prefers this reading.

Verses 20-23. To the Jews I became as a Jew — Conforming myself in all things to their manner of living, so far as I could with innocence. And, inasmuch as in the preceding chapter the apostle directed the Corinthians to comply with the prejudices of their weak brethren, in the affair of meats sacrificed to idols, and declared his own resolution, that if his eating meat occasioned others to sin, he would not eat flesh while he lived; it is therefore probable that his becoming to the Jews as a Jew, implied especially that he observed the distinction of meats enjoined by Moses, while he lived with the Jews in the heathen countries. It may refer also to his circumcising Timothy, to render his preaching acceptable to the Jews. This compliance with the prejudices of the weak he showed only to gain their good-will, and thereby remove their prejudices against himself, and the cause in which he was engaged. For when the Judaizing teachers insisted on the observance of any of the rites of the law, as necessary to salvation, he always resolutely withstood them, as in the case of Titus, Galatians 2:3, 5, 14. To them that are under the law — Who apprehend themselves to be still bound by the Mosaic law; as under the law — Observing it myself while I am among them. As, however, he did not believe the observance of it to be necessary under the gospel, so he did not refuse to converse with those who omitted to observe it; the very thing which he condemned in Peter, Galatians 2:14. To them that are without law — The Gentiles, who did not hold themselves bound to observe Moses’s law; as without law — Neglecting its ceremonies; being not without law to God — But as much as ever obliged to obey its moral precepts; and under the law to Christ — Under an indispensable obligation in duty and gratitude to obey his will in all things, imitate his example, and live to his glory: and in this sense all Christians will be under the law for ever. That I might gain them that are without the law — Might make my ministry more agreeable and useful to such as were Gentiles by birth and education. To the weak — In knowledge, grace, or abilities, or to those whose consciences were uninformed, and therefore scrupulous; I became as weak — I condescended to their weakness by teaching them according to their capacity, 1 Corinthians 3:1, 2; bearing with their infirmities, and complying with them in forbearing the use of those things which they, through weakness, scrupled to use. I am made — I became; all things to all men — I accommodated myself to all persons in all indifferent things, as far as I could consistently with truth and sincerity; that I might by all means — Or, if possible; save some — How few soever the number might be. And this I do for the gospel’s sake — To promote its success to the utmost of my ability; that I might be partaker thereof with you — That in consequence of the faithful discharge of my office, I might retain the divine favour and approbation, and be a sharer with you in all its privileges and blessings, in time and in eternity.

22. To the weak—The weak in faith, of which the weaklings of Romans 14, where see notes, and 1 Corinthians 8:10, are classes. Paul studied and sympathized with their weakness in order to save and bring them from weakness to strength. All things—Transforming himself, as it were, to all the shapes of character he met, yet without hypocrisy or partaking in sin, in order to save those to whom he accommodated himself.

4. These various self-denials are undergone for an eternal future prize, 23-27.

Ver. 22b. All things: limited by the word save to things not actually sinful. To do wrong can save no one.

In-all-ways: leaving untried no method likely to win.

Save: see note, Romans 11:14.

In 1 Corinthians 9:19-22 lies an important principle, viz. that, other things being equal, our spiritual influence over others is in proportion to our nearness to them in the various circumstances and habits of life. In harmony with this principle, the Son of God clothed Himself in human flesh that He might speak to us through human lips and stretch out for our salvation a human hand. Cp. Galatians 4:4. And Paul was accustomed to diminish as far as practicable, by conforming to their habits and practice, the distance between himself and those he sought to save. To the Athenians he spoke as a philosopher, Acts 17:22-31; among Jews, he acted as a Jew, Acts 21:26; but always without surrendering principle, Galatians 2:5. For, to do this, would benefit no one. We shall do well to imitate him. Whatever reminds our hearers that our circumstances and endowments differ from theirs, will lessen the force of our words.

Verse 23. And this I do for the Gospel’s sake] Instead of touto, this, panta, all things, (I do all things for the Gospel’s sake,) is the reading of ABCDEFG, several others, the Coptic, Æthiopic, Vulgate, Itala, Armenian, and Sahidic; the two latter reading tauta panta, all these things.

Several of the fathers have the same reading, and there is much reason to believe it to be genuine.

That I might be partaker thereof with you.] That I might attain to the reward of eternal life which it sets before me; and this is in all probability the meaning of to euaggelion, which we translate the Gospel, and which should be rendered here prize or reward; this is a frequent meaning of the original word, as may be seen in my preface to St. Matthew: I do all this for the sake of the prize, that I may partake of it with you.

Verses 20-23. To the Jews I became as a Jew — Conforming myself in all things to their manner of living, so far as I could with innocence. And, inasmuch as in the preceding chapter the apostle directed the Corinthians to comply with the prejudices of their weak brethren, in the affair of meats sacrificed to idols, and declared his own resolution, that if his eating meat occasioned others to sin, he would not eat flesh while he lived; it is therefore probable that his becoming to the Jews as a Jew, implied especially that he observed the distinction of meats enjoined by Moses, while he lived with the Jews in the heathen countries. It may refer also to his circumcising Timothy, to render his preaching acceptable to the Jews. This compliance with the prejudices of the weak he showed only to gain their good-will, and thereby remove their prejudices against himself, and the cause in which he was engaged. For when the Judaizing teachers insisted on the observance of any of the rites of the law, as necessary to salvation, he always resolutely withstood them, as in the case of Titus, Galatians 2:3, 5, 14. To them that are under the law — Who apprehend themselves to be still bound by the Mosaic law; as under the law — Observing it myself while I am among them. As, however, he did not believe the observance of it to be necessary under the gospel, so he did not refuse to converse with those who omitted to observe it; the very thing which he condemned in Peter, Galatians 2:14. To them that are without law — The Gentiles, who did not hold themselves bound to observe Moses’s law; as without law — Neglecting its ceremonies; being not without law to God — But as much as ever obliged to obey its moral precepts; and under the law to Christ — Under an indispensable obligation in duty and gratitude to obey his will in all things, imitate his example, and live to his glory: and in this sense all Christians will be under the law for ever. That I might gain them that are without the law — Might make my ministry more agreeable and useful to such as were Gentiles by birth and education. To the weak — In knowledge, grace, or abilities, or to those whose consciences were uninformed, and therefore scrupulous; I became as weak — I condescended to their weakness by teaching them according to their capacity, 1 Corinthians 3:1, 2; bearing with their infirmities, and complying with them in forbearing the use of those things which they, through weakness, scrupled to use. I am made — I became; all things to all men — I accommodated myself to all persons in all indifferent things, as far as I could consistently with truth and sincerity; that I might by all means — Or, if possible; save some — How few soever the number might be. And this I do for the gospel’s sake — To promote its success to the utmost of my ability; that I might be partaker thereof with you — That in consequence of the faithful discharge of my office, I might retain the divine favour and approbation, and be a sharer with you in all its privileges and blessings, in time and in eternity.

23. Partaker thereof—Partaker, that is, of the gospel, embracing therein all the blessings, temporal or eternal, in the included gospel. Note on verse

18. This gospel includes the prize of verse 24, the incorruptible crown of verse 25. You—In italics; it is not in the Greek. Literal rendering, be a fellow-partaker of it; that is, a sharer with, not only you, but all the glorified, of the blessed results wrapped up in the gospel. So a blissful eternity is ever present to the faith of Paul, being included in the very gospel he preaches.

Ver. 23. All things; takes up the same words in 1 Corinthians 9:22, 12.

Because of the Gospel etc.: 3rd reason, in addition to those of 1 Corinthians 9:15-18, 19-22 for the conduct stated in 1 Corinthians 9:12b and reasserted in 1 Corinthians 9:22b.

That I may become etc.; expounds because of the Gospel Sharer with others: “by obtaining, in company with those whom I hope to save, the blessings promised in the Gospel.” The good news he announces moves Paul to use all means to save men, because by doing so he will (1 Timothy 4:16) save himself and those who hear him.

V. 24. Know ye not that-In those famous games which are kept at the isthmus, near your city.

They who run in the foot race all run, though but one receiveth the prize-How much greater encouragement have you to run; since ye may all receive the prize of your high calling!

Verse 24. They which run in a race run all] It is sufficiently evident that the apostle alludes to the athletic exercises in the games which were celebrated every fifth year on the isthmus, or narrow neck of land, which joins the Peloponnesus, or Morea, to the main land; and were thence termed the Isthmian games. The exercises were running, wrestling, boxing, throwing the discus or quoit, &c.; to the three first of these the apostle especially alludes.

But one receiveth the prize?] The apostle places the Christian race in contrast to the Isthmian games; in them, only one received the prize, though all ran; in this, if all run, all will receive the prize; therefore he says, So run that ye may obtain. Be as much in earnest to get to heaven as others are to gain their prize; and, although only one of them can win, all of you may obtain.

Verses 24, 25. Know ye not that — In those famous games, which are kept in the isthmus, near your city; they who run in a race — En stadiw, in the stadium, (so the place was called where the athletes contended,) run indeed all — And contend one with another; but one — Only of them all; receiveth the prize — Whereas in the Christian race, the success of one is no hinderance to that of others. How much greater encouragement then have you to run, since you may all receive the prize of your high calling. And every man that striveth for the mastery — That there contendeth; is temperate in all things — To an almost incredible degree; using the most rigorous self-denial in food, sleep, and every other sensual indulgence. It may not be improper to observe here, that “those who taught the gymnastic art, prescribed to their disciples the kind of meat that was proper, the quantity they were to eat, and the hours at which they were to eat: they prescribed to them likewise the hours of their exercise and rest: they forbade them the use of wine and women. So Horace tells us, Article Poetry, line 412: —

Qui studet optatam cursu contingere metam,

Multa tulit fecitque puer, sudavit et alsit,

Abstinuit Venere et Baccho.

A youth who hopes the Olympic prize to gain,

All arts must try, and every toil sustain;

The extremes of heat and cold must often prove,

And shun the weakening joys of wine and love. — FRANCIS. This whole course, which lasted for many years, was called askesiv, exercise. Hence the ancient monks, who imitated, and even outstripped, the athletics in their rules of temperance, and in the laboriousness of their exercises, were called askhtai, ascetics.” Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown — “The crowns for which the Greeks contended in their games, were, for the most part, of the leaves of trees, which, though evergreens, soon withered. In the Olympic games, sacred to Jupiter, the crowns were of the wild olive; in the Pythian, sacred to Apollo, they were of laurel; in the Isthmian, of pines; and in the Nemæan, of smallage, or parsley. The honours, likewise, of which these crowns were the pledges, by length of time lost their agreeableness, and at last perished, being all confined to the present life.” But we are animated by the view of an incorruptible crown; termed a crown of righteousness, 2 Timothy 4:8; and a crown of life, James 1:12; and Revelation 2:10. A crown this which never fades, as the word afqartov, here used, implies: that is, there never shall be any period put to the honours and advantages of it. As a reason for what the apostle here says, Dr. Macknight thinks that his enemies, (who, from his not taking a maintenance, inferred that he was no apostle,) “affirmed, that whatever disinterestedness he might pretend, it was not credible that he would undergo such continued labour in preaching, and in complying with the humours of mankind, unless he had reaped some present advantage from his labours. But to show them the futility of their reasoning, he desired them to consider the long course of laborious discipline and exercise which the contenders in the Grecian games submitted to, for so small a prize as a crown of leaves; which, after their utmost pains, they were not sure of obtaining, and which, when obtained, would soon fade, with all its honours and advantages. Whereas, by the labours and sufferings which he underwent as an apostle, he was sure of obtaining an infinitely better crown, which would never fade.”

24. Know ye not—They had abundant chance to know, from the exhibitions at the Isthmian stadium, near their city. A race—Here, for the first time in the New Testament, occurs an allusion to the ancient games. They are mentioned neither in the gospels nor in the Old Testament. The solemn Hebrews never practised them; and when introduced, with theatres and other spectacles by the Herodian family, they were the abhorrence of all earnest Jews. In the days of his bigoted Judaism Paul would, probably, never have used them as a religious illustration.

But with the Greeks these games, traceable to an heroic age of gods and demigods, were a part of their religion. They were practised to bring the human form to that same idealized perfection as Grecian genius endeavoured to produce in its statues of heroes and gods. They formed a part of the worship of beauty in the human person, as in all other noble forms. Hence the victor in those games, at which all Greece was ambitious to be present, was a noblest of the race, a masterpiece of humanity. He was gazed at, as he proudly passed, as a model of manhood. He was the pride of his family, and honoured by his state and city among her great generals and statesmen. From the victory he departed crowned with a garland, was escorted home in a triumphal chariot, and, in some instances, instead of being received through the ordinary gate, a breach was made in the city wall, that he might be received with a unique triumph.

When, a short time before the birth of Christ, Rome conquered the known world, she adopted the games, varying their form, and in every respect debasing them. By the Greeks they were idealized, by the Romans brutalized. They were no longer heroic exercises in which the noblest men engaged for self-perfection, but exhibitions of ferocious and bloody contests by professional or compulsory combatants, for the gratification of spectators gazing from their safe and cowardly seats upon scenes of savage bloodshed of which others were the inflictors or victims. There were beast fights; of men with beasts or beasts with beasts. There were gladiatorial fights of men with men. These sanguinary exhibitions were not, like the pugilistic fights of our day, followed solely by the baser classes in violation of law, but by the highest aristocracy, and provided for by either eminent individuals or the state itself. The civilization of the age exerted itself in the invention of new ferocities, or in the increased amount of the exhibition. Sylla, the despot of Rome, sent a hundred lions into the arena to be butchered by as many men. But Pompey had six hundred lions and twenty elephants thus slaughtered. Under the Emperor Titus (surnamed “The Delight of the human race”) five thousand wild and four thousand tame animals, and under Trajan eleven thousand animals, were slain for Roman amusement. Still more ferocious were the gladiatorial fights, in which professional combatants, or captives taken in war, or criminals, were made to slaughter each other. This practice began B.C. 264, and made such progress that Trajan exhibited a bloody fight of ten thousand gladiators on the arena for Roman amusement. These scenes created not bravery in the public heart, but a base and cowardly appetite for blood. They aided in spreading that utter depravity through all classes of society that prepared the empire to sink before the northern barbarians.

With these games in their Grecian form the Corinthians, and St. Paul at Corinth, would be familiar. As he travelled from Athens to Corinth he passed the stadium, or race-course, of the celebrated Isthmian games, so called from the Corinthian Isthmus. In the nature of those games he saw the elements of a vivid physical imagery (especially in the race) for the illustration of the Christian life. Almost every point of the gymnastic contest he has in some part of his writings brought into use. Galatians 2:2; 5:7; Philippians 2:16; 3:14; 1 Timothy 6:12; 2 Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 12:1, 4, 12. In the present passage we have the race, the racer, the prize, the temperance, the garland, the herald, the rejected combatant. At verse 26, by a momentary change, the boxing match is the source of allusion.

Run all—All the competitors. One—Paul here illustrates by contrast. In the Isthmian race there could be but one victor among all the runners; in the Christian race every candidate that rightly runs may win the garland. So run—With such applied vigour, with such self-control and concentration, with such increasing persistence, to the end. Obtain—Win.

Ver. 24.-27. Justifies 1 Corinthians 9:23 by the analogy of the athletic festivals so well known at Corinth. See note below.

Racecourse: the oldest and most popular kind of contest.

The prize: same word and thought in Philippians 3:14: the crown (1 Corinthians 9:25) or garland of leaves given to the winner. But one receives etc.: so that it can be obtained only by surpassing all rivals. This thought nerved the athlete to intense exertion. These words are no part of the comparison; (for they are not true of the Christian race;) but are added to depict the intense effort required to gain the prize. In-this-way: like racers.

You are running; asserts that the racer is a pattern of tie Christian. These words remind the readers that, although this metaphor is introduced professedly to expound Paul's own conduct, it is really an example for them.

That you may obtain: expounds in this way, and directs attention to the one essential point of comparison. Like a racer you are aiming at a prize to be obtained only by victory. 1 Corinthians 9:25 brings the comparison of 1 Corinthians 9:24 to bear on the matter of 1 Corinthians 9:23.

Contends-in-the-athletic-festivals: includes racing boxing, and all kinds of athletic contests. Same word in Luke 13:24; John 18:36; Colossians 1:29; 4:12; 1 Timothy 4:10; 6:12; 2 Timothy 4:7. In all things is self-controlled; refers not to the actual race, but to the ten months' preparation. Indeed this preparation was in some sense a part of the contest: for upon it very much depended success or failure. During these ten months, the athlete, not only submitted to the prescribed limitations of food, drink, and the entire mode of life, but without asking whether it was specially enjoined, did whatever would strengthen him for the decisive day and thus increase his chance of victory, and avoided whatever would weaken him.

In all things: emphatic. Every detail of his life was controlled by his earnest purpose to gain the prize.

Crown: not a mark of royalty, (different word in Revelation 12:3; 13:1; 19:12,) but a wreath of leaves (or sometimes a golden imitation of such, Revelation 4:4; 9:7; 14:14) given as (2 Timothy 4:8) a reward, or worn (Philippians 4:1; 1 Thessalonians 2:19) in token of joy. A garland of pine or olive leaves, fit symbol of transitory human glory, was the prize at the Isthmian festival. With this fading wreath Paul contrasts the imperishable reward awaiting the Christian; thus increasing the force of the example in 1 Corinthians 9:25a.

V. 25. And every one that there contendeth is temperate in all things-To an almost incredible degree; using the most rigorous self denial in food, sleep, and every other sensual indulgence. A corruptible crown-A garland of leaves, which must soon wither. The moderns only have discovered that it is legal to do all this and more for an eternal crown than they did for a corruptible!

Verse 25. Is temperate in all things] All those who contended in these exercises went through a long state and series of painful preparations. To this exact discipline Epictetus refers, cap. 35: qeleiv olumpia nikhsaiÈ dei sJ eutaktein, anagkotrofein, apecesqai, pemmatwn,

gumnazesqai prov anagkhn en wra tetagmenh, en kaumati, en yucei, mh yucron pinein, mh oinon wv etucen. aplwv,wv iatrw, paradedwkenai seauton tw epistath. eita eiv ton agwna

parercesqai. k. t. l. “Do you wish to gain the prize at the Olympic games?-Consider the requisite preparations and the consequences: you must observe a strict regimen; must live on food which you dislike; you must abstain from all delicacies; must exercise yourself at the necessary and prescribed times both in heat and in cold; you must drink nothing cooling; take no wine as formerly; in a word, you must put yourself under the directions of a pugilist, as you would under those of a physician, and afterwards enter the lists. Here you may get your arm broken, your foot put out of joint, be obliged to swallow mouthfuls of dust, to receive many stripes, and after all be conquered.” Thus we find that these suffered much hardships in order to conquer, and yet were uncertain of the victory. Horace speaks of it in nearly the same way:—

Qui studet optatam cursu contingere metam,

Multa tulit fecitque puer: sudavit et alsit:

Abstinuit Venere et Baccho.

Deuteronomy Arte Poet., ver. 412.

A youth who hopes the Olympic prize to gain,

All arts must try, and every toil sustain;

Th’ extremes of heat and cold must often prove;

And shun the weakening joys of wine and love.

Francis.

These quotations show the propriety of the apostle’s words: Every man that striveth for the mastery, pavta egkrateuetai, is temperate, or continent, in all things.

They do it to obtain a corruptible crown] The crown won by the victor in the Olympian games was made of the wild olive; in the Pythian games of laurel; in the Nemean games of parsley; and in the Isthmian games of the pine. These were all corruptible, for they began to wither as soon as they were separated from the trees, or plucked out of the earth. In opposition to these, the apostle says, he contended for an incorruptible crown, the heavenly inheritance. He sought not worldly honour; but that honour which comes from God.

Verses 24, 25. Know ye not that — In those famous games, which are kept in the isthmus, near your city; they who run in a race — En stadiw, in the stadium, (so the place was called where the athletes contended,) run indeed all — And contend one with another; but one — Only of them all; receiveth the prize — Whereas in the Christian race, the success of one is no hinderance to that of others. How much greater encouragement then have you to run, since you may all receive the prize of your high calling. And every man that striveth for the mastery — That there contendeth; is temperate in all things — To an almost incredible degree; using the most rigorous self-denial in food, sleep, and every other sensual indulgence. It may not be improper to observe here, that “those who taught the gymnastic art, prescribed to their disciples the kind of meat that was proper, the quantity they were to eat, and the hours at which they were to eat: they prescribed to them likewise the hours of their exercise and rest: they forbade them the use of wine and women. So Horace tells us, Article Poetry, line 412: —

Qui studet optatam cursu contingere metam,

Multa tulit fecitque puer, sudavit et alsit,

Abstinuit Venere et Baccho.

A youth who hopes the Olympic prize to gain,

All arts must try, and every toil sustain;

The extremes of heat and cold must often prove,

And shun the weakening joys of wine and love. — FRANCIS. This whole course, which lasted for many years, was called askesiv, exercise. Hence the ancient monks, who imitated, and even outstripped, the athletics in their rules of temperance, and in the laboriousness of their exercises, were called askhtai, ascetics.” Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown — “The crowns for which the Greeks contended in their games, were, for the most part, of the leaves of trees, which, though evergreens, soon withered. In the Olympic games, sacred to Jupiter, the crowns were of the wild olive; in the Pythian, sacred to Apollo, they were of laurel; in the Isthmian, of pines; and in the Nemæan, of smallage, or parsley. The honours, likewise, of which these crowns were the pledges, by length of time lost their agreeableness, and at last perished, being all confined to the present life.” But we are animated by the view of an incorruptible crown; termed a crown of righteousness, 2 Timothy 4:8; and a crown of life, James 1:12; and Revelation 2:10. A crown this which never fades, as the word afqartov, here used, implies: that is, there never shall be any period put to the honours and advantages of it. As a reason for what the apostle here says, Dr. Macknight thinks that his enemies, (who, from his not taking a maintenance, inferred that he was no apostle,) “affirmed, that whatever disinterestedness he might pretend, it was not credible that he would undergo such continued labour in preaching, and in complying with the humours of mankind, unless he had reaped some present advantage from his labours. But to show them the futility of their reasoning, he desired them to consider the long course of laborious discipline and exercise which the contenders in the Grecian games submitted to, for so small a prize as a crown of leaves; which, after their utmost pains, they were not sure of obtaining, and which, when obtained, would soon fade, with all its honours and advantages. Whereas, by the labours and sufferings which he underwent as an apostle, he was sure of obtaining an infinitely better crown, which would never fade.”

25. Every man that striveth—Every agonistes, or champion. Is temperate—Is self-controlling. Then, as now, the candidate for the race put himself under a long and severe training, in diet, in potations, in exercise, in order to tone himself up to the highest vigour. Even the professional pugilist of our modern execrable prize-fights will, in order to obtain victory, put himself upon a regimen of strict temperance, making himself an example of physical virtue for better men. He is a practical proof that strict abstinence from intoxicating drinks is ordinarily, a requisite condition to the highest health and vigour. He shows too, that the most profligate of men are amply able to discover and recognise the severest truths, when they have even a sordid interest in knowing them. Would the pugilist be as wise, as keenly searching after the truth, as energetic and as self-denying in pursuing the eternal prize as he is the temporal, he could not fail to win. But Paul uses a Greek word that covers more than bodily temperance. It includes self-denial of every kind, and is used by him in reference to his own self-denials in eating idol sacrifices, (1 Corinthians 8:13,) in refusing Churchly maintenance, (verse 15,) and in all the self-mortifying compliances of vv. 19-22. And this reference runs through to the end of the chapter; nay, even to the end of the next chapter. It is a thread of which the reader should not for a moment lose hold who would completely understand St. Paul. Crown—From the pine groves contiguous to the stadium the Corinthians would gather the branches, and wreath a garland for the brow of the victor, amid the applauding crowds of spectators. It was an evergreen; a not unfitting emblem of that earthly immortality of renown which it indicated that the wearer had attained. But, alas! this emblem of imperishability was itself perishable. The lyrics of the poet Pindar are almost the sole mementos of the victors, but they, too, in time will perish.

The most eminent emblematic garland of victory was the laurel. It was said that Apollo, after having slain the dragon Python at Delphos, wreathed his brows with the laurel, and established his oracle at the Castalian spring issuing from the cave at Delphos. At the Olympic games they used the wild olive; at the Nemean, the parsley. An incorruptible—Our Christian life is the race, crowned with everlasting triumph at its close. St. Paul, as he drew near his martyrdom, beautifully styles it the crown of righteousness. 2 Timothy 4:8.

Ver. 24.-27. Justifies 1 Corinthians 9:23 by the analogy of the athletic festivals so well known at Corinth. See note below.

Racecourse: the oldest and most popular kind of contest.

The prize: same word and thought in Philippians 3:14: the crown (1 Corinthians 9:25) or garland of leaves given to the winner. But one receives etc.: so that it can be obtained only by surpassing all rivals. This thought nerved the athlete to intense exertion. These words are no part of the comparison; (for they are not true of the Christian race;) but are added to depict the intense effort required to gain the prize. In-this-way: like racers.

You are running; asserts that the racer is a pattern of tie Christian. These words remind the readers that, although this metaphor is introduced professedly to expound Paul's own conduct, it is really an example for them.

That you may obtain: expounds in this way, and directs attention to the one essential point of comparison. Like a racer you are aiming at a prize to be obtained only by victory. 1 Corinthians 9:25 brings the comparison of 1 Corinthians 9:24 to bear on the matter of 1 Corinthians 9:23.

Contends-in-the-athletic-festivals: includes racing boxing, and all kinds of athletic contests. Same word in Luke 13:24; John 18:36; Colossians 1:29; 4:12; 1 Timothy 4:10; 6:12; 2 Timothy 4:7. In all things is self-controlled; refers not to the actual race, but to the ten months' preparation. Indeed this preparation was in some sense a part of the contest: for upon it very much depended success or failure. During these ten months, the athlete, not only submitted to the prescribed limitations of food, drink, and the entire mode of life, but without asking whether it was specially enjoined, did whatever would strengthen him for the decisive day and thus increase his chance of victory, and avoided whatever would weaken him.

In all things: emphatic. Every detail of his life was controlled by his earnest purpose to gain the prize.

Crown: not a mark of royalty, (different word in Revelation 12:3; 13:1; 19:12,) but a wreath of leaves (or sometimes a golden imitation of such, Revelation 4:4; 9:7; 14:14) given as (2 Timothy 4:8) a reward, or worn (Philippians 4:1; 1 Thessalonians 2:19) in token of joy. A garland of pine or olive leaves, fit symbol of transitory human glory, was the prize at the Isthmian festival. With this fading wreath Paul contrasts the imperishable reward awaiting the Christian; thus increasing the force of the example in 1 Corinthians 9:25a.

V. 26. I so run, not as uncertainly-I look straight to the goal; I run straight toward it. I cast away every weight, regard not any that stand by. I fight not as one that beateth the air-This is a proverbial expression for a man's missing his blow, and spending his strength, not on his enemy, but on empty air.

Verse 26. I therefore so run, not as uncertainly] In the foot-course in those games, how many soever ran, only one could have the prize, however strenuously they might exert themselves; therefore, all ran uncertainly; but it was widely different in the Christian course, if every one ran as he ought, each would receive the prize. The word adhlwv, which we translate uncertainly, has other meanings. 1. It signifies ignorantly; I do not run like one ignorant of what he is about, or of the laws of the course; I know that there is an eternal life; I know the way that leads to it; and I know and feel the power of it. 2. It signifies without observation; the eyes of all the spectators were fixed on those who ran in these races; and to gain the applause of the multitude, they stretched every nerve; the apostle knew that the eyes of all were fixed upon him. 1. His false brethren waited for his halting: 2. The persecuting Jews and Gentiles longed for his downfall: 3. The Church of Christ looked on him with anxiety: 4. And he acted in all things as under the immediate eye of God.

Not as one that beateth the air] Kypke observes, that there are three ways in which persons were said, aera derein, to beat the air. 1. When in practising for the combat they threw their arms and legs about in different ways, thus practising the attitudes of offence and defence. This was termed skiamacia, fighting with a shadow. To this Virgil alludes when representing Dares swinging his arms about, when he rose to challenge a competitor in the boxing match:— Talis prima Dares caput altum in prælia tollit, Ostenditque humeros latos, alternaque jactat Brachia protendens, et verberat ictibus auras. Æn. v., ver. 375.

Thus, glorying in his strength, in open view His arms around the towering Dares threw; Stalked high, and laid his brawny shoulders bare, And dealt his whistling blows in empty air. Pitt.

2. Sometimes boxers were to aim blows at their adversaries which they did not intend to take place, and which the others were obliged to exert themselves to prevent as much as if they had been really intended, and by these means some dexterous pugilists vanquished their adversaries by mere fatigue, without giving them a single blow. 3. Pugilists were said to beat the air when they had to contend with a nimble adversary, who, by running from side to side, stooping, and various contortions of the body, eluded the blows of his antagonist; who spent his strength on the air, frequently missing his aim, and sometimes overturning himself in attempting to hit his adversary, when this, by his agility, had been able to elude the blow. We have an example of this in Virgil’s account of the boxing match between Entellus and Dares, so well told Æneid. v., ver. 426, &c., and which will give us a proper view of the subject to which the apostle alludes: viz. boxing at the Isthmian games.

Constitit in digitos extemplo arrectus uterque, Brachiaque ad superas interritus extulit auras. Abduxere retRomans longe capita ardua ab ictu; Immiscentque manus manibus, pugnamque lacessunt. Ille [Dares] pedum melior motu, fretusque juventa; Hic [Entellus] membris et mole valens; sed tarda trementi Genua labant, vastos quatit æger anhelitus artus. Multa viri nequicquam inter se vulnera jactant, Multa cavo lateri ingeminant, et pectore vasto Dant sonitus; erratque aures et tempora circum Crebra manus; duRomans crepitant sub vulnere malæ, Stat gravis Entellus, nisuque immotus eodem, Corpore tela modo atque oculis vigilantibus exit. Ille, velut celsam oppugnat qui molibus urbem, Aut montana sedet circum castella sob armis; Nunc hos, nunc illos aditus, omnemque pererrat Arte locum, et variis assultibus irritus urget. Ostendit dextram insurgens Entellus, et alte Extulit: ille ictum venientem a vertice velox Prævidit, celerique elapsus corpore cessit. Entellus VIRES IN VENTUM EFFUDIT; et ultRomans Ipse gravis, graviterque ad terram pontere vasto Concidit: ut quondam cava concidit, aut Erymantho, Aut Ida in magna, radicibus eruta pinus.-- Consurgunt studiis Teucri et Trinacria pubes; It clamor cœlo: primusque accurrit Acestes, Æquævumque ab humo miserans attollit amicum. At non tardatus casu, neque territus heros, Acrior ad pugnam redit, ac vim suscitat ira: Tum pudor incendit vires, et conscia virtus; Præcipitemque Daren ardens agit æquore toto; Nunc dextra ingeminans ictus, nunc ille sinistra Nec mora, nec requies: quam multa grandine nimbi Culminibus crepitant; sic densis ictibus heros Creber utraque manu pulsat versatque Dareta. Both on the tiptoe stand, at full extent; Their arms aloft, their bodies inly bent; Their heads from aiming blows they bear afar, With clashing gauntlets then provoke the war. One [Dares] on his youth and pliant limbs relies; One [Entellus] on his sinews, and his giant size. The last is stiff with age, his motions slow; He heaves for breath, he staggers to and fro.-- Yet equal in success, they ward, they strike; Their ways are different, but their art alike. Before, behind, the blows are dealt; around Their hollow sides the rattling thumps resound; A storm of strokes, well meant, with fury flies, And errs about their temples, ears, and eyes: Nor always errs; for oft the gauntlet draws A sweeping stroke along the crackling jaws. Hoary with age, Entellus stands his ground; But with his warping body wards the wound; His head and watchful eye keep even pace, While Dares traverses and shifts his place; And, like a captain who beleaguers round Some strong-built castle, on a rising ground, Views all the approaches with observing eyes; This, and that other part, in vain he tries, And more on industry than force relies. With hands on high, Entellus threats the foe; But Dares watched the motion from below, And slipped aside, and shunned the long descending blow. Entellus wastes his forces on the wind; And thus deluded of the stroke designed, Headlong and heavy fell: his ample breast, And weighty limbs, his ancient mother pressed. So falls a hollow pine, that long had stood On Ida’s height or Erymanthus’ wood.— Dauntless he rose, and to the fight returned; With shame his cheeks, his eyes with fury burned: Disdain and conscious virtue fired his breast, And, with redoubled force, his foe he pressed; He lays on loads with either hand amain, And headlong drives the Trojan o’er the plain, Nor stops, nor stays; nor rest, nor breath allows; But storms of strokes descend about his brows; A rattling tempest, and a hail of blows. Dryden.

To such a combat as this the apostle most manifestly alludes: and in the above description the reader will see the full force and meaning of the words, So fight I, not as one that beateth the air-I have a real and a deadly foe; and as I fight not only for my honour but for my life, I aim every blow well, and do execution with each.

No man, who had not seen such a fight, could have given such a description as that above; and we may fairly presume that when Virgil was in Greece he saw such a contest at the Isthmian games, and therefore was enabled to paint from nature.

Homer has the same image of missing the foe and beating the air, when describing Achilles attempting to kill Hector, who, by his agility and skill, (Pœtice by Apollo,) eluded the blow:— triv men epitJ eporuse podarkhv diov acilleuv egcei calkeiw, triv dJ hera tuye baqeian. ILIAD, lib. xx., ver. 445

Thrice struck Pelides with indignant heart, Thrice, in impressive air, he plunged the dart.-Pope.

Verses 26, 27. I therefore — The reward being so great; so run, not as uncertainly — For I see the goal I am to run to, I keep it continually in view, and run straight to it, casting off every weight, and not regarding any that stand by, so as to be prevented from, or hindered in running, by looking at them. Or, I run not as one that is to pass unnoticed, or undistinguished: as adhlwv seems here to imply; and not without attending to the marks and lines which determine the path in which I am to run. In other words, I run according to all the rules prescribed, and with the greatest activity; knowing that in no part of the course I am out of the view of my Judge, and of a great concourse of spectators. Consider, reader, Christ, the Judge of the world, observes how every man behaves in the station assigned to him, and that with infinitely greater attention than the judge and spectators observed the manner in which the athletes contended. So fight I, not as one that beateth the air — This is a proverbial expression for a man’s missing his blow, and spending his strength, not on the enemy, but on the empty air. But I keep under my body — By all kinds of self-denial and mortification. The word upwpiazw, here used, properly signifies to beat and bruise the face with the fist, or the cestus, as the boxers did in those games; and particularly on the upwpion, the part under the eyes, at which they especially aimed. By the body here the apostle means his old man, or corrupt appetites and passions. And bring it into subjection — To my spirit, and to God. The words are strongly figurative, and signify the mortification of the whole body of sin, by an allusion to the natural bodies of those who were bruised or subdued in combat. Lest, by any means, when I have preached — Greek, khruxav, having discharged the office of a herald to others; (still carrying on the allusion to the Grecian games, in which a herald was employed, whose office it was to proclaim the conditions, and to display the prizes;) I myself should become a castaway — Greek, adokimov, disapproved by the judge, and so fall short of the prize. Here also, as well as in the term last mentioned, the apostle alludes to the same games; and the import of his expressions will more fully appear if we observe, that “at the opening of those exercises, a herald, or crier, publicly proclaimed the names of the combatants, and the combat in which they were to engage, agreeably to a register kept for the purpose by the judges. When their names were published, the combatants appeared, and were examined whether they were free men, and Grecians, and of an unspotted character. Then the crier, commanding silence, laid his hand on the head of the combatant, and led him in that manner along the stadium, demanding with a loud voice of all the assembly, ‘Is there any one who can accuse this man of any crime? Is he a robber, or a slave, or wicked and depraved in his life and manners?’ Having passed through this public inquiry into their life and character with honour, the combatants were led to the altar of Jupiter, and there, with their relations, sware they would not be guilty of any fraud or action tending to the breach of the laws of the sacred games. And to excite the ardour of the combatants, the crowns, the rewards of victory, lay, during the contest, full in their view, on a tripod or table, placed in the stadium. There were also branches of palms exposed, which the victors were to receive along with the crowns, and which they carried in their hands as emblems (says Plutarch) of the insuppressible vigour of their body and mind.”

After the contentions were finished, the conquerors, being summoned by proclamation, marched to the tribunal of the judges, who examined their conduct during the combat. “Then a herald, taking the chaplets from the tripod, placed them on the heads of such of the conquerors as were approved by the judges; and putting into their hands the palms, they led them, thus equipped, through the stadium, preceded by a trumpeter, who, during the procession, proclaimed with a loud voice their names, the names of their fathers, and of their countries, and specified the particular combat in which they were conquerors. And as they passed along, they were saluted with the acclamations of the spectators, accompanied with showers of herbs and flowers, thrown upon them from every side. Such was the office of the herald, or crier, in these games. In allusion to that office, the apostle calls himself khrux, the herald, in the combat for immortality; because he was one of the chief of those who were employed by Christ to introduce into the stadium such as contended for the incorruptible crown. He called them to the combat; he declared the kind of combat in which they were to engage; he proclaimed the qualifications necessary in the combatants, and the laws of the battle. Withal, he encouraged the combatants, by placing the crowns and palms full in their view.” The expression, autov adokimov genwmai, rendered, I myself should be a cast-away, or disapproved, signifies one, who, when tried in the manner described above, was found not to be of the character and station required by the established regulations. “Besides the previous trial, the judges, after the combat was over, made a most accurate and impartial scrutiny into the manner in which the victors had contended, in order to find whether they had contended nomimwv, (2 Timothy 2:5,) according to the laws of the combat. And if, on trial, it appeared that they had failed in the least particular, they were cast. In consequence of this sentence, they were denied the crown, and sometimes beat out of the stadium with disgrace. Such contenders, whether they were cast before or after the combat, were adokimoi, persons not approved. Wherefore, to avoid that disgrace, the apostle, who was a combatant in the Christian race, as well as a herald, was careful to qualify himself for the combat; and in combating, to observe all the laws of the combat, lest, having proclaimed these laws, he should be found not approved himself. This the apostle said to stir up all, but especially the ministers of the gospel, to the greatest diligence in acquiring habits of self-government and purity, not only that they might secure to themselves the crown of righteousness, but that they might be patterns to their people.” — See Macknight, and West’s Pindar.

It is justly observed here by a late writer, that this single passage may give us a just notion of the Scriptural doctrine of election and reprobation; and clearly shows us, that particular persons are not in Holy Writ represented as elected, absolutely and unconditionally, to eternal life; or predestinated, absolutely and unconditionally, to eternal death: but that believers in general are elected to enjoy the Christian privileges on earth, which, if they abuse, those very elect persons will become reprobate. St. Paul was certainly an elect person, if ever there was one: and yet he declares it was possible he himself might become a reprobate. Nay, he would actually have become such, if he had not thus kept his body under, even though he had been so long an elect person, a Christian, and an apostle.

Ver. 26. So fight I, not as one that beateth the air. St. Paul here refers to the Greek and Roman games, one part of which was the cestus, from the Greek word kestov, belt. Montfaucon has given us a splendid engraving of the conflict. Because bruising with the fist maimed the hand, and often disjointed the thumbs of the combatants, they invented the “cest.” The two pugilists held a ball of leather in each hand, attached by a strap to the zone or belt, loaded with weighty matter, and in latter times with iron or lead. With these balls the combatants often gave each other fatal blows, to which the apostle alludes when he speaks of resisting unto blood. But the dexterous combatant often had the address to elude the blow of his antagonist, and then he only beat the air.

26. Uncertainly—Making sure work; leaving nothing to chance. So fight—As a boxer. Beateth the air—Alluding, not to the mock-fight (skiomacia, shadow-fight) used by combatants beforehand for practice, but to the missing his antagonist and striking into vacancy. It stands parallel to uncertainly. Both in his race and his battle Paul did a sure business. In the battle for eternity there is an infinite difference between winning the crown and becoming a castaway.

Ver. 26. After calling (“you,” 1 Corinthians 9:24) his readers athletes, then placing himself (“we,” 1 Corinthians 9:25) among them, Paul now speaks of himself alone; thus bringing 1 Corinthians 9:24, 25 to bear upon 1 Corinthians 9:23.

Then: since Christians are athletes striving for an unfading crown. In this way, in this way: viz. as athletes run and box.

Am running: The Christian life is both a preparation for contest and an actual contest. For each day we make ourselves stronger or weaker for the conflict of tomorrow: and each day we are in actual contact with our adversary, and are or ought to be actually pressing towards the goal. Though the Christian has no rival, a race fitly symbolizes his life. For even the athletic racer forgets his rivals, and simply presses forward with all his powers.

As not without-a-definite-goal; expounds in this way. In his self-denial and efforts Paul, like a racer, has a definite aim in view. I box: another common mode of contest. “Like an athlete, I am not fighting a shadow, but have a real antagonist.” And the visible goal and the real antagonist prompt the self-denial of 1 Corinthians 9:19-23.

V. 27. But I keep under my body-By all kinds of self-denial. And bring it into subjection-To my spirit and to God. The words are strongly figurative, and signify the mortification of the body of sin, by an allusion to the natural bodies of those who were bruised or subdued in combat.

Lest by any means after having preached-The Greek word means, after having discharged the office of an herald, (still carrying on the allusion,) whose office it was to proclaim the conditions, and to display the prizes. I myself should become a reprobate-Disapproved by the Judge, and so falling short of the prize. This single text may give us a just notion of the scriptural doctrine of election and reprobation; and clearly shows us, that particular persons are not in holy writ represented as elected absolutely and unconditionally to eternal life, or predestinated absolutely and unconditionally to eternal death; but that believers in general are elected to enjoy the Christian privileges on earth; which if they abuse, those very elect persons will become reprobate. St. Paul was certainly an elect person, if ever there was one; and yet he declares it was possible he himself might become a reprobate. Nay, he actually would have become such, if he had not thus kept his body under, even though he had been so long an elect person, a Christian, and an apostle.

Verse 27. But I keep under my body, &c.] This is an allusion, not only to boxers, but also to wrestlers in the same games, as we learn from the word upwpiazw, which signifies to hit in the eyes; and doulagwgw, which signifies to trip, and give the antagonist a fall, and then keep him down when he was down, and having obliged him to acknowledge himself conquered, make him a slave. The apostle considers his body as an enemy with which he must contend; he must mortify it by self-denial, abstinence, and severe labour; it must be the slave of his soul, and not the soul the slave of the body, which in all unregenerate men is the case. Lest-having preached to others] The word khruxav, which we translate having preached, refers to the office of the khrux, or herald, at these games, whose business it was to proclaim the conditions of the games, display the prizes, exhort the combatants, excite the emulation of those who were to contend, declare the terms of each contest, pronounce the name of the victors, and put the crown on their heads. See my observations on this office in Clarke’s notes at “Matthew 3:17”. Should be a castaway.] The word adokimov signifies such a person as the brabeutai, or judges of the games, reject as not having deserved the prize. So Paul himself might be rejected by the great Judge; and to prevent this, he ran, he contended, he denied himself, and brought his body into subjection to his spirit, and had his spirit governed by the Spirit of God. Had this heavenly man lived in our days, he would by a certain class of people have been deemed a legalist; a people who widely differ from the practice of the apostle, for they are conformed to the world, and they feed themselves without fear.

ON the various important subjects in this chapter I have already spoken in great detail; not, indeed, all that might be said, but as much as is necessary. A few general observations will serve to recapitulate and impress what has been already said.

1. St. Paul contends that a preacher of the Gospel has a right to his support; and he has proved this from the law, from the Gospel, and from the common sense and consent of men. If a man who does not labour takes his maintenance from the Church of God, it is not only a domestic theft but a sacrilege. He that gives up his time to this labour has a right to the support of himself and family: he who takes more than is sufficient for this purpose is a covetous hireling. He who does nothing for the cause of God and religion, and yet obliges the Church to support him, and minister to his idleness, irregularities, luxury, avarice, and ambition, is a monster for whom human language has not yet got a name.

2. Those who refuse the labourer his hire are condemned by God and by good men. How liberal are many to public places of amusement, or to some popular charity, where their names are sure to be published abroad; while the man who watches over their souls is fed with the most parsimonious hand! Will not God abate this pride and reprove this hard-heartedness?

3. As the husbandman plows and sows in hope, and the God of providence makes him a partaker of his hope, let the upright preachers of God’s word take example and encouragement by him. Let them labour in hope; God will not permit them to spend their strength for nought. Though much of their seed, through the fault of the bad ground, may be unfruitful, yet some will spring up unto eternal life.

4. St. Paul became all things to all men, that he might gain all. This was not the effect of a fickle or man-pleasing disposition; no man was ever of a more firm or decided character than St. Paul; but whenever he could with a good conscience yield so as to please his neighbour for his good to edification, he did so; and his yielding disposition was a proof of the greatness of his soul. The unyielding and obstinate mind is always a little mind: a want of true greatness always produces obstinacy and peevishness. Such a person as St. Paul is a blessing wherever he goes: on the contrary, the obstinate, hoggish man, is either a general curse, or a general cross; and if a preacher of the Gospel, his is a burthensome ministry. Reader, let me ask thee a question: If there be no gentleness in thy manners, is there any in thy heart? If there be little of Christ without, can there be much of Christ within?

5. A few general observations on the Grecian games may serve to recapitulate the subject in the four last verses.

1. The Isthmian games were celebrated among the Corinthians; and therefore the apostle addresses them, 1 Corinthians 9:24: KNOW ye not, &c.

2. Of the five games there used, the apostle speaks only of three. RUNNING; 1 Corinthians 9:24: They which run in a race; and 1 Corinthians 9:26: I therefore so run, not as uncertainly. WRESTLING, 1 Corinthians 9:25: Every man that striveth; o agwnizomenov, he who wrestleth. BOXING, 1 Corinthians 9:26, 27: So fight I, not as one that beateth the air; outw pukteuw, so fist I, so I hit; but I keep my body under; upwpiazw, I hit in the eye, I make the face black and blue.

3. He who won the race by running was to observe the laws of racing-keeping within the white line which marked out the path or compass in which they ran; and he was also to outrun the rest, and to come first to the goal; otherwise he ran uncertainly, 1 Corinthians 9:24, 26, and was adokimov, one to whom the prize could not be judged by the judges of the games.

4. The athletic combatants, or wrestlers, observed a set diet. See the quotation from Epictetus, under 1 Corinthians 9:25. And this was a regimen both for quantity and quality; and they carefully abstained from all things that might render them less able for the combat; whence the apostle says they were temperate in all things, 1 Corinthians 9:25.

5. No person who was not of respectable family and connections was permitted to be a competitor at the Olympic games. St. Chrysostom, in whose time these games were still celebrated, assures us that no man was suffered to enter the lists who was either a servant or a slave, oudeiv agwnizetai doulov, oudeiv strateuetai oikethv. and if any such was found who had got himself inserted on the military list, his name was erased, and he was expelled and punished. allJ ean alw doulov wn, meta timeriav ekballetai tou twn stratiwtwn kataolou. To

prevent any person of bad character from entering the list at the Olympic games, the kerux, or herald, was accustomed to proclaim aloud in the theatre when the combatant was brought forth: mh toutou kathgoreiÈ wste auton aposkeuasamenon thv douleiav thn upoyian outwv eiv touv agwnav embhnai: Who can accuse this man? For which he gives this reason: “that being free from all suspicion of being in a state of slavery, (and elsewhere he says of being a thief, or of corrupt morals,) he might enter the lists with credit.” Chrysost. Homil. in Inscript. Altaris, &c., vol. iii. page 59, Edit. Benedict.

6. The boxers used to prepare themselves by a sort of skiamacia, or going through all their postures of defence and attack when no adversary was before them. This was termed beating the air, 1 Corinthians 9:26; but when such came to the combat, they endeavoured to blind their adversaries by hitting them in the eye, which is the meaning of upwpiazein, as we have seen under 1 Corinthians 9:27.

7. The rewards of all these exercises were only a crown made of the leaves of some plant, or the bough of some tree; the olive, bay, laurel, parsley, &c., called here by the apostle fqarton stefanon, a corruptible, withering, and fading crown; while he and his fellow Christians expected a crown incorruptible and immortal, and that could not fade away.

8. On the subject of the possibility of St. Paul becoming a castaway, much has been said in contradiction to his own words. HE most absolutely states the possibility of the case: and who has a right to call this in question? The ancient Greek commentators, as Whitby has remarked, have made a good use of the apostle’s saying, ei de paulov touto dedoiken o tosoutouv didaxav, ti an eipoimen hmeiv; “If Paul, so great a man, one who had preached and laboured so much, dreaded this, what cause have we to fear lest this should befall us?”

9. On the necessity of being workers together with God, in order to avoid apostasy, Clemens Alexandrinus has some useful observations in his Stromata, lib. vii., page 448, Edit. Oberthur: wJv de, says he, o iatrov ugeian parexetai toiv sunergousi prov ugeian, outwv kai o qeov thn aidion swthrian toiv sunergousi prov gnwsin te kai

eupragian. “As a physician gives health to those who cooperate with him in their cure; so God also gives eternal salvation to them who are workers together with him in knowledge and a godly life.” “Therefore,” says he, “it is well said among the Greeks, that when a certain wrestler, who had long inured his body to manly exercises, was going to the Olympic games, as he was passing by the statue of Jupiter he offered up this prayer: ei panta, w zeu, deontwv moi ta prov ton agwna taoeskeuastai, apodov

ferwn dikaiwv thn nikhn emoi. ‘O Jupiter, if I have performed every thing as I ought in reference to this contest, grant me the victory!’“ May we not feel something of this spirit in seeking the kingdom of God? And can any thing of this kind be supposed to derogate from the glory of Christ? St. Paul himself says, if a man contend for the mastery, yet is he not crowned except he strive lawfully. Shall we pretend to be wiser than the apostle; and say, that we may gain the crown, though we neither fight the good fight nor finish the course?

I CORINTHIANS

Verses 26, 27. I therefore — The reward being so great; so run, not as uncertainly — For I see the goal I am to run to, I keep it continually in view, and run straight to it, casting off every weight, and not regarding any that stand by, so as to be prevented from, or hindered in running, by looking at them. Or, I run not as one that is to pass unnoticed, or undistinguished: as adhlwv seems here to imply; and not without attending to the marks and lines which determine the path in which I am to run. In other words, I run according to all the rules prescribed, and with the greatest activity; knowing that in no part of the course I am out of the view of my Judge, and of a great concourse of spectators. Consider, reader, Christ, the Judge of the world, observes how every man behaves in the station assigned to him, and that with infinitely greater attention than the judge and spectators observed the manner in which the athletes contended. So fight I, not as one that beateth the air — This is a proverbial expression for a man’s missing his blow, and spending his strength, not on the enemy, but on the empty air. But I keep under my body — By all kinds of self-denial and mortification. The word upwpiazw, here used, properly signifies to beat and bruise the face with the fist, or the cestus, as the boxers did in those games; and particularly on the upwpion, the part under the eyes, at which they especially aimed. By the body here the apostle means his old man, or corrupt appetites and passions. And bring it into subjection — To my spirit, and to God. The words are strongly figurative, and signify the mortification of the whole body of sin, by an allusion to the natural bodies of those who were bruised or subdued in combat. Lest, by any means, when I have preached — Greek, khruxav, having discharged the office of a herald to others; (still carrying on the allusion to the Grecian games, in which a herald was employed, whose office it was to proclaim the conditions, and to display the prizes;) I myself should become a castaway — Greek, adokimov, disapproved by the judge, and so fall short of the prize. Here also, as well as in the term last mentioned, the apostle alludes to the same games; and the import of his expressions will more fully appear if we observe, that “at the opening of those exercises, a herald, or crier, publicly proclaimed the names of the combatants, and the combat in which they were to engage, agreeably to a register kept for the purpose by the judges. When their names were published, the combatants appeared, and were examined whether they were free men, and Grecians, and of an unspotted character. Then the crier, commanding silence, laid his hand on the head of the combatant, and led him in that manner along the stadium, demanding with a loud voice of all the assembly, ‘Is there any one who can accuse this man of any crime? Is he a robber, or a slave, or wicked and depraved in his life and manners?’ Having passed through this public inquiry into their life and character with honour, the combatants were led to the altar of Jupiter, and there, with their relations, sware they would not be guilty of any fraud or action tending to the breach of the laws of the sacred games. And to excite the ardour of the combatants, the crowns, the rewards of victory, lay, during the contest, full in their view, on a tripod or table, placed in the stadium. There were also branches of palms exposed, which the victors were to receive along with the crowns, and which they carried in their hands as emblems (says Plutarch) of the insuppressible vigour of their body and mind.”

After the contentions were finished, the conquerors, being summoned by proclamation, marched to the tribunal of the judges, who examined their conduct during the combat. “Then a herald, taking the chaplets from the tripod, placed them on the heads of such of the conquerors as were approved by the judges; and putting into their hands the palms, they led them, thus equipped, through the stadium, preceded by a trumpeter, who, during the procession, proclaimed with a loud voice their names, the names of their fathers, and of their countries, and specified the particular combat in which they were conquerors. And as they passed along, they were saluted with the acclamations of the spectators, accompanied with showers of herbs and flowers, thrown upon them from every side. Such was the office of the herald, or crier, in these games. In allusion to that office, the apostle calls himself khrux, the herald, in the combat for immortality; because he was one of the chief of those who were employed by Christ to introduce into the stadium such as contended for the incorruptible crown. He called them to the combat; he declared the kind of combat in which they were to engage; he proclaimed the qualifications necessary in the combatants, and the laws of the battle. Withal, he encouraged the combatants, by placing the crowns and palms full in their view.” The expression, autov adokimov genwmai, rendered, I myself should be a cast-away, or disapproved, signifies one, who, when tried in the manner described above, was found not to be of the character and station required by the established regulations. “Besides the previous trial, the judges, after the combat was over, made a most accurate and impartial scrutiny into the manner in which the victors had contended, in order to find whether they had contended nomimwv, (2 Timothy 2:5,) according to the laws of the combat. And if, on trial, it appeared that they had failed in the least particular, they were cast. In consequence of this sentence, they were denied the crown, and sometimes beat out of the stadium with disgrace. Such contenders, whether they were cast before or after the combat, were adokimoi, persons not approved. Wherefore, to avoid that disgrace, the apostle, who was a combatant in the Christian race, as well as a herald, was careful to qualify himself for the combat; and in combating, to observe all the laws of the combat, lest, having proclaimed these laws, he should be found not approved himself. This the apostle said to stir up all, but especially the ministers of the gospel, to the greatest diligence in acquiring habits of self-government and purity, not only that they might secure to themselves the crown of righteousness, but that they might be patterns to their people.” — See Macknight, and West’s Pindar.

It is justly observed here by a late writer, that this single passage may give us a just notion of the Scriptural doctrine of election and reprobation; and clearly shows us, that particular persons are not in Holy Writ represented as elected, absolutely and unconditionally, to eternal life; or predestinated, absolutely and unconditionally, to eternal death: but that believers in general are elected to enjoy the Christian privileges on earth, which, if they abuse, those very elect persons will become reprobate. St. Paul was certainly an elect person, if ever there was one: and yet he declares it was possible he himself might become a reprobate. Nay, he would actually have become such, if he had not thus kept his body under, even though he had been so long an elect person, a Christian, and an apostle.

Ver. 27. Lest — I myself should be a castaway. Saurin has a good thought here, that St. Paul’s having the full assurance of faith, had no fear of falling from God, and perishing at last. But yet, to touch the loose professors of the age, he, by a sort of abstraction of thought, supposes himself not only to be in very great danger of falling from God, but of falling into hell, and perishing at last. Therefore he would keep his body in all the habits of temperance and exercise. He would run the race with equal steps; he would fight the good fight of faith, that at last he might receive the crown. He speaks to others by word and deed: So run that ye may obtain. Let the professors of the present age, who dress and feast, and smoke and drink, and cannot lift up their little finger in the way of self-denial, think of this.

27. I keep under—Viewing his body as ready, with its fleshly appetites, (the reverse of the temperate of verse 25,) to break the certainty and surety of his running, he beat it to discoloration. Note on Luke 18:5, where the same Greek word is used in a slightly different sense. The term is a pugilistic one; literally, to black-eye one. Paul refers not, as the Romanists pervert the word, to any bodily flagellation, any more than beateth the air refers to a muscular blow. Nor, as Mr. Alford well says, does it refer even to “fasting and prayer,” but to the self-subduing and self-denial, as we have specified in note to verse 25. Bring it into subjection—Literally, enslave it. Have preached—Have heralded. The Greek word for preacher in the New Testament is khrux, herald, and to preach is to herald, (the word used here,) that is, to proclaim, to announce, to call. In the games the herald was one who made the proclamations; so that Paul happily uses the word in its double sense. So Chrysostom, quoted by Wetstein, says: “Tell me, I pray you, at the Olympic contests does not the herald stand proclaiming strong and high, ‘Does any one charge that this candidate is a slave? a thief? a man of bad morals?’” A castaway—A rejectee, or reprobate, who could not stand the double scrutiny. The first scrutiny was to decide whether he was worthy to enter the games: the second was to decide whether he had so run, honourably and according to rule, as to be entitled to the evergreen chaplet. If not, he was rejected as a reprobate and a castaway. It is by only an apparent confusion that Paul here makes himself play the part both of herald and athlete. In fact, the Emperor Nero did once play both these parts. He was combatant, victor, and chosen herald to proclaim his own triumph.

This elaborate illustration of the Christian life from the Isthmian games, for the first time drawn by Paul, must have formed a striking picture to the Corinthians, who were so familiar with the animating spectacle. Henceforward the sight of the stadium would awaken higher thoughts. It had a lesson to inspire them to new earnestness in the Christian race to make sure work of winning the incorruptible crown.

Ver. 27. Bruise: as boxers do. So far is Paul from fighting a mere shadow that his own body is his adversary whom he must conquer if he is to win the crown. For, through the body sin seeks to conquer him and rob him of the prize. See Romans 8:13. These words reveal the great influence of the body, in Paul's view, upon the Christian life. But the figurative nature of the passage forbids us to infer that Paul inflicted upon his body pain or injury as a spiritual exercise.

Lead-as-a-slave: he not only conquers it and robs it of power, by refusing to indulge its desires and dislikes, but compels it to work out his own purposes. And he presents (Romans 12:1; 6:19) the captive as a sacrifice to God. Paul's refusal of maintenance, and the bodily toil resulting therefrom, and his refusal to eat meat which might injure a weak brother, were blows against the spiritual power of his own body, and tended to make the body more and more a servant of the spirit within. He inflicts these blows lest his body gain the upper hand, and thus ruin him. Herald: see Romans 2:21. At the festival he summoned the athletes to the contest.

Rejected: as unworthy of the prize. i.e. lose his soul. For the prize is eternal life, James 1:12; 1 Timothy 6:12. Hence the solemn examples in 1 Corinthians 10. It is the opposite of “become sharer of the Gospel,” 1 Corinthians 9:23. By divine appointment Paul calls men to contend for an unfading crown. But, like all preachers of the Gospel, he is himself an athlete as well as a herald. And he is careful lest, after summoning others to contend, himself fall short of the prize. In-any-way: for in many ways we may fall.

From 1 Corinthians 9:24-27 we learn that not to do our utmost to save, at any personal sacrifice, the souls of others, is to imperil our own salvation. For such effort and sacrifice strengthen the spiritual life. And so serious is our conflict and so tremendous are its issues that we dare not leave unused any means of spiritual strength. Therefore, in seeking to save others we are working out our own salvation.

SECTION 16 reasserts 1 Corinthians 9:12b, and gives three reasons for it. To refuse maintenance in order not to hinder the Gospel, is an outgrowth of spiritual life, and is therefore to Paul a ground of present inward joy and confidence, 1 Corinthians 9:15-18. To save others, Jews or Gentiles, is itself a “gain” worthy of pursuit, 1 Corinthians 9:19-22. Moreover, Paul is an athlete, contending for an eternal prize: and therefore, even to save his own soul, he uses all possible means to save others, 1 Corinthians 9:23-27.

Of the GREEK ATHLETIC FESTIVALS, the most famous was that held every fourth year at Olympia in the west of the Peloponnese. Very famous and ancient also was the Isthmian festival held every two years at the Isthmus, about eight miles from, and in full sight of, the city of Corinth. Similar festivals were held at Nemea and Delphi. But in these the athletic element was less conspicuous. All these were instituted before the dawn of history. Other festivals in imitation of them, were held in Paul's day in many cities of Asia e.g. at Tarsus, and notably at Antioch in Syria.

All athletes, i.e. competitors for prizes, had ten months' training under the direction of appointed teachers and under various restrictions of diet. At the beginning of the festival they were required to prove to the judges that they were of pure Greek blood, had not forfeited by misconduct the right of citizenship, and had undergone the necessary training. Then began the various contests, in an appointed order. Of these, the oldest and most famous was the footrace. Others were wrestling, boxing, chariot and horse racing. The prize was a wreath (or crown) of olive at Olympia, and of pine leaves (at one time of olive) at the Isthmus. The giving of the prizes was followed by processions and sacrifices, and by a public banquet to the conquerors. The whole festival at Olympia lasted five days. The importance of these athletic festivals in the eyes of the ancient Greeks is difficult to appreciate now. They were the great family gatherings of the nation, held under the auspices, and under the shadow of the temples, of their gods. The laws regulating them were held as binding by the various independent states of Greece. The month in which they were held was called the sacred month, and was solemnly announced. And all war between Greek states ceased, under pain of the displeasure of their gods, while the festival lasted. The festivals were attended by immense crowds from all the Greek states and from even the most distant colonies. The various states sent embassies, and vied with each other in the splendor of them and of the gifts they brought. The greatest cities thought themselves honored by the victory of a citizen. The victor was received home with a triumphal procession, entered the city by a new opening broken for him through the walls, was taken in a chariot to the temple of its guardian deity, and welcomed with songs. In some cases a reward in money was given, and release from taxation. In honor of the successful athlete poems were written; of which we have specimens in the poems of Pindar. A statue of the victor was permitted to be placed, and in many places was placed, by townsmen or friends, in the sacred grove of the presiding deity. An avenue of these statues, shadowed by an avenue of pine trees, leading up to the temple of Poseidon, which stood within 200 yards of the race-course at the Isthmus of Corinth, is mentioned by Pausanias, bk. ii. 1. 7. Close by this temple with its avenue of statues Paul probably passed on his way from Athens to Corinth.

The Olympic festival, which survived the longest, was abolished in A.D. 394, four years after the public suppression of paganism in the Roman Empire.

The Greek Athletic Festivals must be carefully distinguished from the bloody Roman Gladiatorial Combats.

That these athletic festivals permeated and molded the thought both of classic writers and of the Apostle to the Gentiles, we have abundant proof. Eternal life is to be obtained only by contest and victory: 1 Corinthians 9:24ff; Philippians 3:14; 1 Timothy 6:12; 2 Timothy 2:5; 4:7f: cp. Luke 13:24; Hebrews 12:1; James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4; Revelation 2:10; 3:11. The Christian life is both a preparation for conflict, 1 Corinthians 9:25; 2 Timothy 2:5; a race, 1 Corinthians 9:24; Philippians 3:12; Acts 20:24; 2 Timothy 4:7; a boxing, 1 Corinthians 9:27, and a wrestling, Ephesians 6:12. Paul's converts will be his crown in the great day: 1 Thessalonians 2:19; Philippians 4:1. And, just as the athlete, victorious but not yet crowned, lay down to rest on the evening after conflict, waiting for the glories of the morrow, so Paul: 2 Timothy 4:7f.

This metaphor presents an important view of the Christian life a needful complement of Paul's doctrine of justification by grace and through faith. Though eternal life is altogether a free gift of God, it is given only to those who strive for it with all their powers. Therefore we must ever ask, not only whether an action open to us is lawful, but whether it will increase or lessen our spiritual strength. Just so, an athlete would forego many things otherwise harmless, and some not even forbidden by the laws for athletes, simply because he was striving for a prize.

Again, this metaphor receives in turn its needful complement in the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. Had we to contend for life in our own strength, we might be doubtful of the result, as was many a resolute athlete on the morning of the contest. But in us is the might of God crushing (Romans 16:20; 1 John 4:4) our adversary under our feet, and carrying us (1 Kings 18:46) forward to the goal. Therefore, day by day we go down into the arena to fight with foes infinitely stronger than we, knowing that “we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us.” That the crowded Isthmian Festival was held each alternate year at the very gates of Corinth and almost under the shadow of its Acropolis, must have given to the metaphor of 1 Corinthians 9:24ff special force in the minds of the Corinthians. And, possibly, Paul was himself present at a festival during (Acts 18:11) his eighteen months' sojourn at Corinth, using perhaps the opportunity to summon the assembled strangers to a nobler contest.