1Cor 9:1

“"No man hath seen God at any time." What God does he mean? The Word? But he has already said: "Him we have seen and heard, and our hands have handled the Word of life." Well, (I must again ask, ) what God does he mean? It is of course the Father, with whom was the Word, the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, and has Himself declared Him. He was both heard and seen and, that He might not be supposed to be a phantom, was actually handled. Him, too, did Paul behold; but yet he saw not the Father. "Have I not," he says, "seen Jesus Christ our Lord? " Moreover, he expressly called Christ God, saying: "Of whom are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever." He shows us also that the Son of God, which is the Word of God, is visible, because He who became flesh was called Christ.”

“Nor indeed, if, among the Greeks, in accordance with the carelessness of custom, women and wives are classed under a common name-however, there is a name proper to wives-shall we therefore so interpret Paul as if he demonstrates the apostles to have had wives? For if he were disputing about marriages, as he does in the sequel, where the apostle could better have named some particular example, it would appear right for him to say, "For have we not the power of leading about wives, like the other apostles and Cephas? "But when he subjoins those (expressions)which show his abstinence from (insisting on) the supply of maintenance, saying, "For have we not the power of eating and drinking? "he does not demonstrate that "wives" were led about by the apostles, whom even such as have not still have the power of eating and drinking; but simply "women," who used to minister to them in the stone way (as they did) when accompanying the Lord.”

“And what kind of invidiousness is the pungency of humility? "To God I give thanks that I have baptized none of you, except Crispus and Gaius, lest any say that I have baptized in mine own name." "For neither did I judge to know anything among you but Jesus Christ, and Him crucified." And, "(I think) God hath selected us the apostles (as) hindmost, like men appointed to fight with wild beasts; since we have been made a spectacle to this world, both to angels and to men: "And, "We have been made the offscourings of this world, the refuse of all: "And, "Am I not free? am I not an apostle? have I not seen Christ Jesus our Lord? " With what kind of superciliousness, on the contrary, was he compelled to declare, "But to me it is of small moment that I be interrogated by you, or by a human court-day; for neither am I conscious to myself (of any guilt); "and, "My glory none shall make empty."”

“"Am I not an Apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?" Inasmuch as he had said, "If meat make my brother to stumble I will eat no flesh forever;" a thing which he had not yet done, but professed he would do if need require: lest any man should say, "Thou vauntest thyself at random, and art severe in discourse, and utterest words of promise, a thing easy to me or to any body; but if these sayings come from thy heart, shew by deeds something which thou hast slighted in order to avoid making thy brother stumble:" for this cause, I say, in what follows he is compelled to enter on the proof of this also, and to point out how he was used to forego even things permitted that he might not give offence, although without any law to enforce his doing so. And we are not yet come to the admirable part of the matter: though it be admirable that he abstain even from things lawful to avoid offence: but it is his habit of doing so at the cost of so much trouble and danger "For why," saith he, "speak of the idol sacrifices? Since although Christ had enjoined that those who preach the Gospel should live at the charge of their disciples, I did not so, but chose, if need were, to end my life with famine and die the most grievous of deaths, so I might avoid receiving of those whom I instruct." Not because they would otherwise be made to stumble, but because his not receiving would edify them: a much greater thing for him to do. And to witness this he summons themselves, among whom he was used to live in toil and in hunger, nourished by others, and put to straits, in order not to offend them. And yet there was no ground for their taking offence, for it would but have been a law which he was fulfilling. But for all this, by a sort of supererogation he used to spare them. "Am I not an Apostle?" For besides all that hath been said, this also makes no small difference that Paul himself is the person thus conducting himself. As thus: To prevent their alleging, "You may taste of the sacrifices, sealing at the same time:" for a while he withstands not that statement, but argues, "Though it were lawful, your brethren's harm should keep you from doing so;" and afterwards he proves that it is not even lawful. In this particular place, however, he establishes the former point from circumstances relating to himself. And intending presently to say that he had received nothing from them, he sets it not down at once, but his own dignity is what he first affirms: "Am I not an Apostle? am I not free?" Thus, to hinder their saying, "True; thou didst not receive, but the reason thou didst not was its not being lawful;" he sets down therefore first the causes why he might reasonably have received, had he been willing to do so. Further: that there might not seem to be any thing invidious in regard of Peter and such as Peter, in his saying these things, (for they did not use to decline receiving;) he first shows that they had authority to receive, and then that no one might say, "Peter had authority to receive but thou hadst not," he possesses the hearer beforehand with these encomiums of himself. And perceiving that he must praise himself, (for that was the way to correct the Corinthians,) yet disliking to say any great thing of himself, see how he hath tempered both feelings as the occasion required: limiting his own panegyric, not by what he knew of himself, but by what the subject of necessity required. For he might have said, "I most of all had a right to receive, even more than they, because 'I labored more abundantly than they.'" But this he omits, being a point wherein he surpassed them; and those points wherein they were great and which were just grounds for their receiving, those only he sets down. "Am I not an Apostle? am I not free?" i.e. "have I not authority over myself? am I under any, to overrule me and forbid my receiving?" "But they have an advantage over you, in having been with Christ." "Nay, neither is this denied me." With a view to which he saith, "Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?" For "last of all," saith he, "as unto one born out of due time, He appeared unto me also." Now this likewise was no small dignity: since "many Prophets," saith He, "and righteous men have desired to see the things which ye see, and have not seen them:" and, "Days will come when ye shall desire to see one of these days." "What then, though thou be 'an Apostle,' and 'free,' and hast 'seen Christ,' if thou hast not exhibited any work of an Apostle; how then can it be right for thee to receive?" Wherefore after this he adds, "Are not ye my work in the Lord?" For this is the great thing; and those others avail nothing, apart from this. Even Judas himself was "an Apostle," and "free," and "saw Christ;" but because he had not "the work of an Apostle," all those things profited him not. You see then why he adds this also, and calls themselves to be witnesses of it. Moreover, because it was a great thing which he had uttered, see how he chastens it, adding, "In the Lord:" i.e., "the work is God's, not mine."”

“Blessed Paul, in the work of his ministry, not only met with opposition from those without, but discouragement from those within. He was under reproach; false brethren questioned his apostleship, and were very industrious to lessen his character and sink his reputation; particularly here at Corinth, a place to which he had been instrumental in doing much good, and from which he had deserved well; and yet there were those among them who upon these heads created him great uneasiness. Note, It is no strange nor new thing for a minister to meet with very unkind returns for great good-will to a people, and diligent and successful services among them. Some among the Corinthians questioned, if they did not disown, his apostolical character. To their cavils he here answers, and in such a manner as to set forth himself as a remarkable example of that self-denial, for the good of others, which he had been recommending in the former chapter. And, 1. He asserts his apostolical mission and character: Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? To be a witness of his resurrection was one great branch of the apostolical charge. "Now," says Paul, "have not I seen the Lord, though not immediately after his resurrection, yet since his ascent?" See Co1 4:8. "Am I not free? Have I not the same commission, and charge, and powers, with the other apostles? What respect, or honour, or subsistence, can they challenge, which I am not at liberty to demand as well as they?" It was not because he had no right to live of the gospel that he maintained himself with his own hands, but for other reasons. 2. He offers the success of his ministry among them, and the good he had done to them, as a proof of his apostleship: "Are not you my work in the Lord? Through the blessing of Christ on my labours, have not I raised a church among you? The seal of my apostleship are you in the Lord. Your conversion by my means is a confirmation from God of my mission." Note, The ministers of Christ should not think it strange to be put upon the proof of their ministry by some who have had experimental evidence of the power of it and the presence of God with it. 3. He justly upbraids the Corinthians with their disrespect: "Doubtless, if I am not an apostle to others, I am so to you, Co1 9:2. I have laboured so long, and with so much success, among you, that you, above all others, should own and honour my character, and not call it in question." Note, It is no new thing for faithful ministers to meet with the worst treatment where they might expect the best. This church at Corinth had as much reason to believe, and as little reason to question, his apostolical mission, as any; they had as much reason, perhaps more than any church, to pay him respect. He had been instrumental in bringing them to the knowledge and faith of Christ; he laboured long among them, nearly two years, and he laboured to good purpose, God having much people among them. See Act 18:10, Act 18:11. It was aggravated ingratitude for this people to call in question his authority.”

“Am I not an apostle? am I not free?.... The Syriac, Ethiopic, and Vulgate Latin versions, put the last clause first; so the Alexandrian copy, and some other copies; and many interpreters are of opinion that it is the best order of the words; the apostle proceeding by a gradation from the less to the greater, having respect either to his freedom in the use of things indifferent, as eating of meats, &c. for though he did not think fit to use his liberty, to the wounding of weak consciences, it did not follow therefore that he was not free, as some might suggest from what he had said in the latter part of the foregoing chapter: or he may have respect to his freedom from the ceremonial law in general; for though, for the sake of gaining souls to Christ, he became all things to all men; to the Jews he became a Jew, that he might gain them; yet in such a manner as to preserve his liberty in Christ, without entangling himself with the yoke of bondage. Some have thought he intends, by his liberty, his right to insist upon a maintenance, and that he was no more obliged to work with his hands than other persons, of which he treats at large hereafter; but to me it rather seems that the words stand in their right order; and that, whereas there were some persons that either denied him to be an apostle, or at least insinuated that he was not one, nor was he to be treated as such, he goes upon the proof of it; and the first thing he mentions is his freedom, that is, from men; no man had any authority over him; he was not taught, nor sent forth, nor ordained by men as a minister, but immediately by Jesus Christ, as apostles were; they were set in the first place in the church, and had power to instruct, send forth, and ordain others; but none had power over them; and this being the apostle's case, proved him to be one; he was an apostle, because he was free: have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? He had a spiritual sight of him by faith, but that did not show him to be an apostle; this is what he had in common with other believers: whether he saw him in the flesh, before his crucifixion and death, is not certain; it is very probable he might; yet this was no more than what Herod and Pontius Pilate did; but he saw him after his resurrection from the dead, to which he refers, Co1 15:8 and designs here, as a proof of his apostleship, this being what the apostles were chosen to be eyewitnesses of, Act 10:41 and publish to the world: now our apostle saw him several times; first at the time of his conversion, next when in a trance at Jerusalem, and again in the castle where the chief captain put him for security, and very probably also when he was caught up into the third heaven: are not you my work in the Lord? as they were regenerated, converted persons, and were become new creatures; not efficiently, but instrumentally; they were God's workmanship, as he was the efficient cause of their conversion and faith; his only, as an instrument by whom they believed; and therefore he adds, "in the Lord"; ascribing the whole to his power and grace: however, as he had been the happy instrument of first preaching the Gospel to them, and of begetting them again through it; of founding and raising such a large flourishing church as they were; it was no inconsiderable proof of his apostleship.”

“Am I not an apostle? - It is sufficiently evident that there were persons at Corinth who questioned the apostleship of St. Paul; and he was obliged to walk very circumspectly that they might not find any occasion against him. It appears also that he had given them all his apostolical labors gratis; and even this, which was the highest proof of his disinterested benevolence, was produced by his opposers as an argument against him. "Prophets, and all divinely commissioned men, have a right to their secular support; you take nothing: - is not this from a conviction that you have no apostolical right?" On this point the apostle immediately enters on his own defense. Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? - These questions are all designed as assertions of the affirmative: I am an apostle; and I am free - possessed of all the rights and privileges of an apostle. Have I not seen Jesus Christ - From whom in his personal appearance to me, I have received my apostolic commission. This was judged essentially necessary to constitute an apostle. See Act 22:14, Act 22:15; Act 26:16. Are not ye my work - Your conversion from heathenism is the proof that I have preached with the Divine unction and authority. Several good MSS. and versions transpose the two first questions in this verse, thus: Am I not free? am I not an apostle? But I cannot see that either perspicuity or sense gains any thing by this arrangement. On the contrary, it appears to me that his being an apostle gave him the freedom or rights to which he refers, and therefore the common arrangement I judge to be the best.”

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