Russian synodal translation. Bible Online Commentary on 1 Corinthians 9

Am I not an apostle? Am I free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my business in the Lord?If for others I am not an Apostle, then for you Apostle; for the seal of my apostolate is you in the Lord.

Here is my defense against those who condemn me.Or do we not have the power to eat and drink?Or do we not have the power to have a sister wife as a companion, like the other Apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?Or do I and Barnabas alone not have the power not to work?What warrior ever serves on his payroll? Who, having planted vineyards, does not eat its fruit? Who, while shepherding the flock, does not eat milk from the flock?

Is it only human reasoning am I saying this? Doesn't the law say the same?For in the Law of Moses it is written: "Do not block the mouth of the threshing ox." Does God care about oxen?Or, of course, for us it is said? So, for us it is written; for whoever plows must plow with hope, and whoever threshes, gotta thresh hoping to get what you want.If we have sown spiritual things in you, how great is it if we reap your bodily things?If others have power over you, do we not more? However, we did not use this power, but we endure everything, so as not to put any obstacle to the gospel of Christ.

Don't you know that the priests are nourished from the sanctuary? that those who serve the altar take a share of the altar?So the Lord commanded those who preach the gospel to live from the gospel.But I didn't use any of that. And I didn't write it so that it would be so for me. For it is better for me to die than for anyone to destroy my praise.For if I preach the gospel, then I have nothing to boast about, because this is a necessary duty mine and Woe is me if I do not preach!For if I do it voluntarily, then will have an award and if not voluntarily, then I only perform service entrusted to me.What is my reward for? Because, preaching the gospel, I proclaim the gospel of Christ free of charge, not using my power in the gospel.

For being free from all, I have enslaved myself to all in order to gain more:to the Jews I was like a Jew, in order to gain the Jews; to those under the law he was as under the law, in order to gain those under the law;for those who are strangers to the law - as a stranger to the law, - not being a stranger to the law before God, but under the law to Christ - in order to gain strangers to the law;to the weak he was as the weak, that he might gain the weak. I have become everything to everyone in order to save at least some.I do this for the sake of the Gospel, that I may be a partaker of it.

Do you not know that all who run in the race run, but one is rewarded? So run to get.All ascetics abstain from everything: those in order to receive a crown of perishability, and we - incorruptible.And that is why I do not run as if I were wrong, I do not fight in such a way that I only beat the air;but I subdue and enslave my body, so that, having preached to others, I myself will not be unworthy.

In this chapter the apostle seems to be answering some of the cavils against him.

II. Claims his right to live from the gospel, and defends it with several arguments, v. 3-14.

III. Speaks of voluntarily giving up one's privileges and rights for their good, v. 15-18.

IV. Lists some more instances of self-denial for spiritual gain and the salvation of others, v. 19-23.

V. The apostle concludes by explaining what inspires him to do so, v. 24-27.

Verses 1-2. The blessed Paul in his ministry faced not only opposition from outside, but also disappointments from within. He was criticized, false brothers challenged his apostolic authority, tried to humiliate his dignity and slander his reputation. In particular, this was the case in Corinth, the city where so much good was done through him and from where he had a right to expect gratitude. Nevertheless, there were those among them that caused him too much anxiety and grief. Some of the Corinthians doubted Paul's apostleship and even rejected it altogether. He answers their cavils in this chapter, and in such a way as to set himself as an example of self-denial for the good of others, which he called for in the previous chapter. So,

1. He defends his apostolic calling and authority: Am I not an apostle?.. Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? To be a witness to the resurrection of Christ was considered one of the very important requirements for those applying for the apostleship. “Am I not free? Do I not have the same rights, authority, and authority as the other apostles? Can't I demand the same respect, or honor, or material content, as they do? Paul earned his living with his own hands, not because he had no right to live from the gospel, but for quite different reasons.

2. As evidence of his apostleship, he cites the success of his ministry among them: “Are you not my work in the Lord? Have I not founded, thanks to the blessing of Christ on my labors, a church among you? The seal of my apostolate is you in the Lord. Your turning to God through my ministry is a confirmation that my mission is from God.”

3. He quite rightly reproaches the Corinthians for their disrespect for him: “If I am not an Apostle to others, I am an Apostle to you…, v. 2. I have worked so long and with such success among you that you should, more than others, recognize and honor me, and not question my apostleship. That the Corinthians questioned Paul's apostleship was a great ingratitude on their part.

Verses 3-14. Having established his apostolic authority, Paul further asserts his rights, which belong to his ministry, in particular the right to material provision.

I. He enumerates his rights, v. 3-6. “Here is my defense against those who condemn me. Or do we not have the power to eat and drink? Or do we not have the power to have a sister wife as a companion, like the other Apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas, and receive material support not only for ourselves, but also for them? Although Paul was single at that time, yet he had the right to marry if he wanted to, and to take his wife with him and count on the upkeep of the churches both for himself and for her. Or do I and Barnabas alone not have the power not to work? (Art. 6).

II. Paul gives a number of arguments in support of his rights.

1. From the usual practice of people and their calculations. Every one who devotes himself to some work in this world expects to live off that work, v. 79. Warriors receive maintenance for their service. Farmers and shepherds feed on the fruits of their labor: What warrior ever serves on his payroll? Who, having planted vineyards, does not eat its fruit? Who, while shepherding the flock, does not eat milk from the flock? (vv. 7-9). And it is natural and perfectly reasonable for ministers to expect their livelihood from their labor.

2. From the Jewish Law: Do I say this from human reason alone? Doesn't the law say the same? (Article 8). Is this a simple human custom, the establishment of a purely human mind? No, this is consistent with the law of Moses. God commanded in the law not to hinder the ox from eating the grain that it threshes. But this law was given by God, mainly not for the sake of oxen, not out of concern for them, but in order to teach people to take care of those who work for us or who work for our good - they must eat from the fruits his work, Art. 10. It is impossible to stop the mouth of someone who selflessly works for our spiritual good.

3. From the requirements of simple justice: If we have sown spiritual things in you, how great is it if we reap your bodily things? What they sowed into them was incomparably better than what they hoped to reap from them. They were instruments in the hand of God, and through them the Corinthians received great spiritual blessings. Could they not claim their share of their bodily to sustain their existence? Having received so many blessings through the apostles, were they not willing to do a little good for them?

4. Paul refers to the support that the Corinthians gave to other ministers: “If others have authority over you, do we not?... You support other ministers, and you recognize this as quite just. But who can claim more support for the Corinthian church than me? Who has worked so hard for your good or served you so much as I have?”

Note, Ministers are to be honored and provided for according to their merit. “However,” says the apostle, “we did not use this power, but we endure everything, so as not to put any obstacle to the piety of Christ. We do not claim our rights, but rather remain in need to serve the interests of the gospel and contribute to the salvation of souls.” He preferred to renounce his right rather than hinder his success by claiming it. He denied himself so as not to give temptation, but defended his rights so that by his self-denial he would not bring criticism to the ministry as such. He who generously neglects his own rights intercedes most earnestly for the rights of others. It is clear that the apostle was guided by this case a sense of justice, not selfishness.

5. The apostle also refers to the ruling of the ancient Jews: “Don't you know that those who serve in the priesthood are nourished from the sanctuary? that those who serve the altar take a share of the altar? (Art. 13). If the Jewish priests ate from the holy things that were sacrificed, then can't Christ's ministers eat from their ministry? He claims that Christ gave the same command: "So the Lord commanded those who preach the gospel to live from the gospel (v. 14), they have a right to material support, although they should not demand it or insist on it." It is the duty of the members of the church to provide materially for their ministers, according to the command of Christ, although it is not the duty of every minister to demand or accept this provision. He can give up his rights, like Paul, and not sin in doing so, but whoever refuses to support him violates the command of Christ.

Verses 15-18. Here Paul speaks of his renouncing his privileges in spite of all this, and explains the reasons for this refusal.

I. He tells them that he renounced his rights in the past: But I did not enjoy anything like that .., v. 15. He received help from others, but not from them, and he had reasons for this. And now he writes about it not to insist on his rights. Although he defends his rights, he does not claim them, he renounces them for the good of the Corinthians and for the sake of the Gospel.

II. The reason for this refusal was that he would not be deprived of his praise: ...it is better for me to die than for anyone to destroy my praise, v. 15. Praise does not mean boasting, or self-importance, or a thirst for praise from people, but a sublime feeling of satisfaction and comfort. His only desire was to preach the gospel without burdening anyone. He decided not to lose this satisfaction among the Corinthians. It was better for him to die than to lose his praise, that is, than to give occasion to say about himself that he prefers reward to work. No, he was ready to deny himself for the sake of the gospel.

Note, The glory of the minister is that he prefers the success of his ministry to material interests, that he casts himself out for the service of Christ and the salvation of souls.

III. Paul claims that his self-denial brought him much more satisfaction and joy than preaching the gospel: “For if I preach the gospel, then I have nothing to boast about, because this is my necessary duty, and woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! (Art. 16). This is my duty, my calling, this is the work I have been appointed to do as an apostle of ch. 1:17. This is my necessary duty, and if I do not preach, then I am betraying my duty, violating a clearly expressed command, and woe to me. Those who are placed in this ministry are required to preach the gospel. And woe to him if he does not. But no one, not a single preacher of the Gospel is charged with the obligation to do his work for free. Perhaps, sometimes, under certain circumstances, he must preach without getting paid for his work, but he retains the right to it and the right to expect it from those among whom he labors. When he renounces this right for the sake of the gospel and for the sake of souls, then he shows self-denial, deprives himself of his rights and privileges, does more than what the duty of a minister requires of him. Woe to him if he does not preach the gospel, but sometimes he must insist on maintenance for his work, and whenever he refrains from doing so, he deprives himself of his right, although sometimes a person may feel obliged to do so, out of a debt of love to God and neighbor.

Note, To give up one's own rights for the good of others is a high accomplishment, and will receive a special reward from the Lord. For IV. The apostle says that if we do our duty voluntarily, we will receive a generous reward from the Lord: If I do this voluntarily, then I will have a reward ... Only voluntary service is worthy of God's reward. God promises a reward not for a dry performance of duty, but for a heartfelt, voluntary, joyful one. If we do not attach hearts to our duties, they will become disgusting to Him; it will be only a dead body of religion, without life and spirit. Ministers are entrusted with the New Testament economy or government, Lu. 16:2. The willing servants of Christ will not lose their reward, and it will be in proportion to their faithfulness and diligence, but the lazy and involuntary servants will be called to account.

V. Summing up, the apostle shares with the Corinthians the comforting hope of the great reward he expected for his remarkable self-denial: What reward then for me?... (v. 18). Why do I expect a reward from God? ...For the fact that, preaching the Gospel, I proclaim the gospel of Christ free of charge, without using my authority in the gospel. Or: "I do not insist on my rights in such a way as to damage the great goal of my ministry, I renounce them for its sake." To use one's power to the detriment of the purposes for which it is given is to abuse it. The apostle never exercised his authority or his right to the material provision of his ministry in such a way as to interfere with his purposes, but voluntarily and willingly denied himself for the glory of Christ and the salvation of souls.

Verses 19-23. Taking occasion from the preceding discussion, the apostle mentions several other examples of how he denied himself and gave up his freedom for the good of others.

I. He claims his freedom (v. 19): Being free from all... He was a free man, a Roman citizen. He was not a slave to anyone, he did not depend materially on anyone, but he enslaved himself to everyone in order to gain more. He behaved like a slave, worked for his own provision, like a slave. He tried to please as a slave pleases his master. He behaved in many cases as if he had no rights, and did so in order to gain more, that is, to have more converts to Christianity. He made himself a slave so they could be free.

II. He lists several examples of how he made himself the slave of everyone. He adapted to all categories of people.

1. To the Jews and those under the law he was as a Jew and as one under the law, in order to gain them. He obeyed the law in order to reach those under the law and turn their hearts to Christ.

2. For those who are strangers to the law, as strangers to the law, that is, for pagans, both converted and not converted to Christianity. In matters of minor importance, not of fundamental importance, he could adapt to their customs and mores for their good. He could reason with philosophers in their own language. Among the converted Gentiles, he behaved like a man free from Jewish laws, although not as a lawless person, but as under the law of Christ. He did not break the laws of Christ to please or indulge any man, but he was indulgent and accommodating to all men, when it could be done legally, for the sake of gaining at least some of them. Being an apostle of the Gentiles, Paul could, it would seem, disregard the Jews, and yet, for their good, desiring to win at least some of them for Christ, he, neglecting his right to act otherwise, conformed to their customs and laws in some cases. . He was not scrupulous to trifles.

3. For the weak he was as weak, that he might gain the weak..., v. 22. Paul did not despise or condemn them, but became like them, like one of them, refraining for their sake from the exercise of his freedom and being careful not to put a stumbling block in their path. He abstained from it whenever they could, from the weakness of their understanding of the truth or from the strength of their prejudices, fall into sin or depart from the truth of the Gospel and return to paganism because of his free conduct. He denied himself for them, in order to win their souls. In short, he became everything to everyone in order to save (by all legal means) at least some. He could not sin against God in the name of the salvation of his neighbor, but he was ready to give up himself with joy. He could not betray the rights of God, but he could give up his own, and very often he did just that for the good of others.

III. He gives the reason for this course of action (v. 23): I do this for the sake of the gospel, that I may be a partaker of it, that is, for the honor of Christ, to whom the gospel belongs, and for the salvation of souls to whom it is intended, that they also may become partakers of all of it. privileges with the apostle.

Note, A heart that burns with zeal for God, and thirsts for the salvation of men, will not defend and assert its rights and privileges to the detriment of these purposes. And whoever uses his power in evangelizing not to the creation, but to the destruction of the cause of God, he abuses it.

Verses 24-27. In these verses, Paul makes it clear what inspired him to act in this way. He expected a glorious reward - an incorruptible crown. He compares himself to the runners in the Olympic competitions, well known to the Corinthians, because they were held in their neighborhood: Do you not know that all those who run in the race run, but one receives the reward? .. (v. 24). So,

I. He urges them to do their duty: “... So run to receive. The Christian race is completely different from yours, where only one wins the reward. All runners can receive a reward on it. You can all run to get it. This should inspire you to exert all diligence and courage, to be constant in your pursuit. If you run well, you will not be left without success. Besides, honorable competition is permissible, you should try to outdo the other. And whoever first reaches heaven or receives a higher reward in this blessed world, that one has gloriously labored. I run with all zeal, and you do the same when you see me running ahead of you.

II. He gives them directions as to how they should run, presenting his personal example more fully before them.

1. Those participating in sports games must observe the regime: “All ascetics refrain from everything .., Art. 25. Competitors adhere to a strict diet and discipline during training. They forgo the food they eat at other times and many of the privileges they usually enjoy. Should not Christians all the more give up their privileges for such a glorious purpose as their reward in heaven? Ascetics usually eat poorly, moreover, simple food, denying themselves a lot in order to be ready for competition. I do the same; so should you, following my example.”

2. They not only abstained from everything, but also accustomed themselves to difficulties. Those who were to take part in sports wrestling, during training, beat the air, in the words of the apostle, or waved their arms, preparing for a real fight with a real opponent. Such exercises are impossible in Christian warfare. Christians are constantly engaged in real struggle. Their enemies are always in fierce opposition to them and constantly persecute them. Therefore, Christians must always resist them, never leave the battlefield, never give up or give up. They must struggle not like those who only beat the air, but fight against their enemies with all their strength. One enemy Paul mentions here is our body; it must be controlled, subdued and enslaved, and thus kept in subjection. The body is to be understood carnal desires and attraction. The apostle made it his task to restrain, curb them, and the Corinthians were to imitate him in this.

Note, Those who want to prosper spiritually must subdue their bodies, subdue their resistances, and keep them in subjection, fight hard against carnal lusts, not indulge in excesses, and not desire heathen sacrifices, not to eat them, not to please their flesh, at the risk of hurting the soul. his brother. The body should serve the spirit, not dominate it.

III. The apostle, wishing to convince the Corinthians to follow his advice, resorts to another argument, taken from the same example with the ascetics on the lists.

1. They subjected themselves to every restraint and strict rules to obtain a crown of perishability (v. 25), and we incorruptible. Winners in sports competitions were crowned with wreaths of withering leaves and branches of laurel or olive tree. But Christians are waiting for an incorruptible crown, an unfading crown of glory, an incorruptible inheritance reserved in heaven for them. If one who has in the future only worthless enthusiastic cries of the crowd and a wreath of leaves can subject his body to severe hardships, then can’t a Christian who hopes to receive a crown of glory make every effort to enslave his carnal inclinations and conquer sin ?

2. Participants in sports run on the wrong one. All flee, but one receives the reward, v. 24. None of the runners is sure whether he will win or not. But the struggling Christian is not in such an uncertain position. Everyone can run in such a way as to receive a reward, but only on condition that he keeps to the intended course, follows the path of the prescribed duty, which, as some believe, means to run not as to the wrong .., v. 2 6. If the Greek runners did their best, although only one of them could receive a reward, should not Christians, each of whom is guaranteed a crown, show much more diligence?

3. Paul warns of the danger that threatens him and them if they give in to their carnal inclinations, cherishing the body and indulging its lusts: I subdue and enslave my body, lest, having preached to others, I myself should not be unworthy (v. 27) , rejected, not approved, to whom the judge will not award the crown.

Note: A preacher of salvation can lose salvation. He may show others the way to heaven, but he himself will never enter there. The apostle needed holy fear to remain faithful, how much more do we need this fear?

In continuation of his speech from chapter 8, Paul, by his own example, shows the attitude towards rights. And his attitude towards God and his brothers. Paul's main concern is that his behavior should not stumble anyone and turn away from Christianity. The manifestation of love in the sacrifice of one's own rights for the good of his brothers and the protection of the gospel - Paul showed not in words, but by his own example, voluntarily renouncing many of his rights.

9:1 1 Am I not an apostle? Am I free? Paul, in continuing the conversation that not every freedom benefits the cause of God and fellow believers (freedom, for example, to eat and drink in temples, as they believed in Corinth), shows that he, as an apostle, has many different rights to act one way or another . However, he goes on to show the difference between a right and its exercise. And that he often does not use his apostolic rights - for the benefit of meetings, thereby emphasizing the idea of ​​the need to think no longer about his freedom with rights, but about waving his legal freedom, not accidentally “killing” his fellow believers.Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my business in the Lord?
In itself, the fact of the existence of a congregation of Christians in Corinth because of the gospel of Paul is a living proof that Paul is doing the work of the Lord, and in Corinth the spiritual fruits of his apostolic activity are evident.

9:2 If for others I am not an Apostle, then for you [Apostle]; for the seal of my apostolate is you in the Lord.
The Christians of Corinth, standing in the Lord despite numerous difficulties and trials in the faith, must themselves understand that by themselves they confirm and prove the apostleship of Paul, as if they put a seal on the "certificate" of Paul's identity: after all, thanks to the help of this apostle, they were able to become Christians.

9:3 Here is my defense against those who condemn me.
These words indicate that some Christians in the Corinthian congregation questioned Paul's apostolic authority. And in order to stop the mouths of those who condemn Paul, who are deceitful and reproach him for the impurity of some deeds (in this case, material enrichment at the expense of meetings), he just cited the meeting of Corinth as direct evidence of his apostolate.

9:4-6 Showing the difference between a right and its exercise, Paul lists many of his rights, which the rest of the apostles enjoy, but he himself does not use them:
Or do we not have the power to eat and drink? Paul has the right to enjoy the hospitality of the congregations, but he tries not to burden them once again with concerns about his personal needs.

Or do we not have the power to have a sister wife as a companion, like the other Apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? Paul has the right to marry a spiritual sister, but is not married
Or do I and Barnabas alone not have the power not to work? Pavel has the right not to work, but he works. His right not to work, but to live at the expense of the gospel, he defends with clear examples.

9:7 What warrior ever serves on his payroll? Who, having planted vineyards, does not eat its fruit? Who, while shepherding the flock, does not eat milk from the flock?
Paul speaks of the right to be supported by the congregations, using the example of a literal warrior, a vinedresser, and a shepherd. If he is a warrior of the Lord, "a vinedresser and a shepherd" in the congregations, then he has every right to be supported by the congregations: it is just as normal for the evangelist as it is for the warrior, vinedresser and shepherd to eat from the fruits of his activity. And, on the contrary, it would be absurd to think that a warrior should serve the state - at his own expense, and a shepherd and a vinedresser - do not have the right to eat grapes and drink milk from the herd.

9:8-10 8 Is it only from human reason that I say this? Doesn't the law say the same? So that those who doubt Paul do not think that he is talking gag, Paul cited the word of God as the basis for his reasoning:
9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: Do not stop the mouth of a threshing ox. Does God care about oxen? 10 Or, of course, is it said for us?
In ancient times, a threshing ox (plowing or working when threshing cereals) - in the course of its work, it could pick up grain or pluck grass. The owners did not have the thought to forbid the ox to "snack" or not to give him food: it is natural to feed the working ox. It is just another thing that is absurd - not to give the ox the opportunity to eat.

Quoting from the law of God about threshing oxen, Paul reveals the meaning of the command of the past - for the present: how absurd it is not to feed the threshing ox - just as absurd to think that it is not necessary to help in needs an evangelist who works in the spiritual
So, for us it is written; for whoever plows must plow in hope, and whoever threshes [must thresh] in hope of getting what is expected .

How does Paul know that the command about oxen applies to preaching Christians as well? Good knowledge The Scriptures and the holy spirit revealed to Paul the principle of God's attitude towards those who work for the good of God's people: according to the law of Moses, the opportunity for the "plowing ox" is provided - to be fed at the hands of those for whom he plows. If the ox is not fed, he will become exhausted and will not be able to thresh bread.

In the message about the oxen in the law, Paul showed the Corinthians a wonderful visual example of the image of preachers "threshing" spiritual bread.
Therefore, preachers "thresh" with the hope of getting spiritual shoots in those to whom they preach (this is their hope). And whoever grows spiritually on the "works" of Paul, it will not be difficult for him to understand that from time to time Paul needs the most necessary (for example, he wants to eat) and has the right to expect hospitality from those for whom he labors in the word. And Paul's expectations are not his own whim or fiction: to work with the hope of receiving a return in the spiritual fruit, shown in practice by caring for the worker - God himself allows them.

9:11 If we have sown spiritual things in you, how great is it if we reap your bodily things?
The spiritual, no doubt, is much more valuable than the material (corporeal, necessary for the body), because it gives eternal life. But without food - not enough. And if Paul feeds the congregations with valuable spiritual bread that provides eternal life for them, then why not feed Paul with ordinary bread that provides life for Paul for one day?

9:12 If others have power over you, do we not more?
Here is the culmination of Paul's discourse on rights and freedom to use them, which was widespread in Corinth and stumbled the weak in the faith: Paul knows perfectly well the principle of freedom of action within the framework of fulfilling the will of the Lord, but for the sake of the interests of the Church he consciously refrains from much:
However, we did not use this power, but we endure everything, so as not to put any obstacle to the gospel of Christ.

After all, in addition to knowing about the possibility of acting freely, a Christian must also learn the principle Christian love and the duty to preserve all for whom Christ died - for God and His Christ, not placing a barrier before them for the perception of the good news.

Why can a barrier arise from the exercise of freedom to exercise some of one's rights - on the part of the "strong"?
Because it is good to preach with the word, but if at the same time you do something that makes the listeners embarrassed, then the manifestation of the ACT has a stronger effect on them than the manifestation of the word. After all, if I speak, for example, about the abomination of worshiping pagan "gods", and I myself go to a temple, then who will believe my words?
Or if I talk beautifully about how a Christian should work with his own hands, while I myself constantly rob the congregations, then how will they believe my words?
And in this way I myself will erect a barrier to the action of the word of God with those who listen - only the freedom to be supported by the assemblies of Christians (which some deceitful Christians of Corinth reproached the apostle for)

9:13,14 Don't you know that the priests are nourished from the sanctuary? that those who serve the altar take a share of the altar?
Another an example of antiquity will help not only to confirm the idea of ​​the need to support the evangelists who do not have time to work for themselves personally because of the heavy workload in the word - but will later help the Christians of Corinth to understand the idea that, eating from the altar of demons, they become part of the worship of demons.
But for now, in this example, Paul again shows their right to receive the services and help of the congregation, for evangelism is a spiritual sacrifice:
14 So the Lord commanded those who preach the gospel to live from the gospel.
Paul asserts his right to receive a livelihood from the meetings only to emphasize that he is not going to use it:

9:15 but I didn't use any of that. And I didn't write it to be that way for me. For it is better for me to die than for anyone to destroy my praise.
Paul does not personally consider it possible for himself to use the meeting to meet his personal urgent needs and sit on the “neck” of their provision, burdening fellow believers with this. For Paul, having the reputation of "sitting on the neck of the congregation" is better off dead;then provideyourself good life at their expense. And solely in order to gain them all for God.
(as we will learn later, there were also such Christians in Corinth who reproached Paul for secretly robbing the congregations -2 Corinthians 12:16).

9:16 For if I preach the gospel, then I have nothing to boast about, because this is my necessary [duty], and woe to me if I do not preach the gospel
After all, if I proclaim the Good News, what can I boast about? This is my duty, I was obliged to fulfill it! Woe to me if I do not proclaim it!(Good news)
Paul was entrusted with the gospel, but his praise is not that he can earn his living by doing so. And in the acquisition of people for God and His Christ.
He cannot imagine life without the gospel and does what he likes to do, for him this is not a job to expect a “salary” from meetings, but an activity that brings pleasure and satisfaction with the meaning of life. He is already happy that he has been entrusted with the work of evangelism, what other reward can there be? Satisfaction with life, as you know, is in itself a sufficient “payment” for his choice to work in the cause of the Lord and the congregations.

9:17 For if I do this voluntarily, then [I will] have a reward; and if involuntarily, then [I perform only] the service entrusted to me .
If he did it on his own initiative, one could count on a reward. But if this is entrusted by God, then he is in this matter as a servant of God, obliged to fulfill His commission. Why should people reward him for what he owes to the Lord? It is his personal choice to fulfill the task, so a Christian should not count on the fact that from the gospel he materiallyget rich (later he said that should stay awayfrom those who expect get rich from piety - the fulfillment of the will of God, including - from the preaching ministry, 1 Tim. 6: 5).
Therefore, Paul does not count on material rewards from meetings (unlike those false apostles who "sit on the neck" of meetings ( 2 Corinthians 11:20 ).

9:18 What is my reward for? Because, preaching the gospel, I proclaim the gospel of Christ free of charge, without using my power in the gospel .
So what is my remuneration? The fact that I proclaim the Good News without compensation and do not use the rights that it gives me.(Good News)
Paul shows in what, in what form expect a rewardevangelizing Christian, loving God and accepting His commissions as his holy obligation to Him. His only reward is that from God he has the opportunity and ability to preach the gospel without shifting the material care of himself onto the shoulders of the congregation - as an obligation to take care of him.

Therefore, although God allows living from the gospel at the expense of fellow believers, however, the spiritually mature Apostle Paul understands that it is wrong to “sit on the neck” of the congregation because he is fulfilling God’s order. And this is his principled personal position:
give no reason to think that he preaches for profit, as many modern pastors do today.
(later he will expose those false apostles who abused this power, plundering the congregations cleanly -2 Corinthians 11:20)

9:19 For being free from all, I have enslaved myself to all in order to gain more:
Paul goes on to explain what his freedom in Christ looks like compared to the freedom of the Christians of Corinth: he uses his freedom not to satisfy his personal needs or desires, but solely as a slave to Christian duty. For the duty of a Christian is not to take care of his own well-being, but to win more people for God who are worthy of salvation. Therefore, he has to push his personal - to the background, and to the fore to put the interests of those whom he acquires for God through the gospel and his God-fearing behavior.
Paul goes on to show the principle of winning someone for God: every Christian should try to be sensitive and not only think about how he himself perceives this or that in spiritual teachings. But also - about the feelings of those who listen: in that which is not a sin - it is not only possible, but necessary, to yield. Only in this way can one become everything for everyone in order to gain at least one of them for God (see De.16:1-3)

9:20 to the Jews I was like a Jew, in order to gain the Jews; to those under the law he was as under the law, in order to gain those under the law;
In order to make it easier for the Jews to respond to the good news and accept Christ - he did not trump his complete freedom from the Mosaic Law, but if necessary, in order to avoid their stumbling - he followed the instructions of the Old Testament rituals, although he knew that this was not essential and he had every right it is from God not to recognize all this (Acts 21:26).

9:21 for those who are strangers to the law - as a stranger to the law, - not being a stranger to the law before God, but under the law to Christ - in order to gain strangers to the law ;
Although the fulfillment of many points from the Law of Moses, familiar to Paul from childhood, did not in any way contradict faith in Christ, living among the pagans, Paul, nevertheless, preferred not to embarrass them, so that they would not decide that what Paul himself does by nature, being brought up among the Jews - it is obligatory for fulfillment and among other believers at the level of the law of Christ.
He did not impose on them circumcision and the performance of rites according to the Mosaic law, knowing from God that the end of the law is Christ; he was in no hurry to condemn their lifestyle, did not reproach them "from the threshold" for the fact that idols were set up in the Areopagus and demons were worshiped, but delicately searched for what could be found in their beliefs to switch their attention to God the Almighty and His Christ
(Acts 17:16, 22,23)

That is, Paul directed all his abilities in Christian freedom to find flexible approaches to people with different religious views, characters, customs, and to interest the listeners with the good news, regardless of who was in front of him: an open pagan or a Jew. He did not worry about his personal needs at all, making do with little.

9:22 to the weak he was as the weak, that he might gain the weak. I have become everything to everyone in order to save at least some .
Among the weak, Paul chose not to exercise his freedom. He showed by the example of food offered to idols that it is better to refuse "sacred" meat than to prevent the weak from accepting Christ with this meal. Paul did not want them to stumble, deciding that either Paul is a lawless person or Christian freedom is a broad path with optional fulfillment of God's commandments.
With those who considered themselves strong in faith, Paul dealt with them according to their strength, did not spare either in reproofs or in reprimands. With those who were weak in faith, he acted with due regard for their conscience, without provoking them in any way to do what they are wary of or what they still doubt.

Became everything for everyone - does not mean that with drunkards, for example, Paul behaved like a drunkard, and with boors - like a boor.
It's just that Paul tried not to burden people with unnecessary things and not to pull them out of their usual environment of life - always and everywhere, if it was possible to do this without violating the commandments of God.
For example, if Paul were preaching in a locality where ties are badly treated, instead of requiring others to wear ties, Paul would take off his own even if he had always worn it before.

And all this Paul did not do as an opportunist who wants to please both ours and yours, in order to appear good to everyone and have personal gain from this, at least in the form of honoring his authority or some kind of service.
And solely for the sake of those who listen to him desire to draw closer to God and serve Him.
And precisely because Paul sought to please not people, but God, people did not like him for this.

9:23 I do this for the sake of the Gospel, that I may be a partaker of it.
Participate or become a participant - not only in the sense of preaching the gospel, but also in spiritual revival from the word of God and in receiving the promises promised by this gospel.
The main task of the apostle was to find those who wanted to go to God in the way of Christ.
He fought for each newcomer to the congregation, sacrificing personal desires and, protecting those who are taking their first steps, from grief from the side of those who “stand firmly on their feet” in the faith. For which, in fact, he received from the "strong" - large portions of hostility towards himself.

9:24 Do you not know that all who run in the race run, but one is rewarded? So run to get.
The Christians of Corinth knew what the winner of the participants in a mass race over some distance means. Having accepted Christ, they all also became participants in the gospel - a "race" to receive at the "finish" eternal life, only the distance of this "competition" is long for the rest of a Christian's life.
And in order to receive a reward from participating in this "competition" - you need to try to run in the forefront, that is, make great efforts, and not just enjoy walking along the starting path, hoping for your rights of free movement, "zigzag" and diverting left and right on the way to the finish line.

9:25 All ascetics abstain from everything: those in order to receive a crown of perishability, and we - incorruptible.
And if the participants sports competitions make great efforts, renouncing many of their rights and abstaining from many pleasures - just for the sake of receiving the laurel crown of the winner of the competition, how much more should they make efforts and give up much more to gain eternal life - a Christian who is a participant in the Gospel.
In Corinth, they didn't seem to think about it at all, thinking that Christianity is one way of life with many personal blessings in the form of many pleasures.

9:26,27 26 And therefore I do not run as to the unfaithful, I do not fight so as to only beat the air; but I subdue and enslave my body, so that, having preached to others, I myself will not be unworthy.
Paul gives them a personal example of a participant in the “race” to God: his starting path to Him is not a walking path with rest houses along the sides. And his run through life is not like the illusion of a run that does not bring any benefit: a daily exhausting struggle to pacify his own desires in order to preach the message of salvation to others, while not being unworthy of salvation himself.
Preaching the gospel and making a Christian righteous according to the word of God are inseparable. All this together makes up the Christian way, pleasing to God.

Why did Paul say this to the Christians of Corinth? To the fact that in Corinth they devoted a lot of time to preaching, but nothing at all - to the preservation of those who responded to the sermon and to watching their own righteousness. What can happen to all preachers of the Gospel today.

b. On the Reasonable Attitude to Privileges (9:1 - 10:13)

1) Paul's positive example (chapter 9). The apostle concludes his warning against the use of liberty that might harm a brother by saying that he would rather become a vegetarian if it would keep his brother from temptation (8:13). Then he shows how he himself puts into practice what he preaches about the rights of the believer in relation to food and drink. Apparently, in some places by that time a rumble of doubts had already swept over the legitimacy of Paul's apostleship, and later he would defend it more reasonably and in detail (especially in 2 Corinthians 10-13).

Paul explicitly applies the principle he outlined in chapter 8 to what seems to have become a "ball of contention" in Christian discussions about his right to be an apostle. It is about his resolute refusal to accept financial assistance from those whom he served, so that no one would say that in his service he is guided by considerations of self-interest.

1 Cor. 9:1-2. Paul confirms his position as an apostle by his awareness of the freedom of the Christian and his rights. All four questions in these verses are rhetorical and imply a positive answer, although some Corinthians would probably answer no to one or all of them. The third and fourth questions are directly related to the apostolate, but what he actually states in the fourth question seems to Paul more important than what he says in the third.

While making much of his defense of his apostleship in 2 Corinthians, Paul does not even mention having seen the Lord (compare Acts 1:21), but he returns to the topic of verse 2 of chapter 9 frequently, arguing that the Corinthian believers are the evidence of him. apostolate (2 Cor. 3:1-3; 5:12; 7:14-16; 8:24).

1 Cor. 9:3. Paul's defense of his apostleship is built on his voluntary renunciation of his rights (verses 4-23). This defense, in fact, consists in explaining why he refused material support from the church, to which he had a full right (verses 1-2). And this, among other things, served as a good example for believers who were strong in knowledge and concerned about their rights (chapter 8).

1 Cor. 9:4-6. The word exousia, translated in these verses as power (in the sense of "right"), is also used in 8:9, where it is translated as "freedom." The concept it expresses connects chapters 8 and 9, although here Paul is not talking about eating food offered to idols, but about ordinary food. To make clear the meaning of the questions posed in verses 4 and 6, the phrase "live at the expense of the church" could be added to them (compare Matt. 10:10-11). Not only Paul, however, renounced his right, but also Barnabas. Apparently, they adhered to this rule already in their first joint missionary journey (Acts 13:1 - 14:28), and, presumably, they did not change it later, when they worked for the Lord separately.

1 Cor. 9:7. The right to live by one's own labor is regarded by Paul as a principle that is true not only of the apostles, but also of other workers within the church; he refers to six proofs, the first of which is in the generally accepted custom: farmers and shepherds live by their labor.

1 Cor. 9:8-10. Second, the Old Testament legitimizes the principle of remuneration for work. Many Bible commentators, however, have been confused by this Pauline example and explanation. Why does the apostle, noticing that "the mouth of the threshing ox is not shut up", then raises the question: Does God care about oxen? Did he encroach on the meaning of what was said in the Old Testament verse? Martin Luther, however, was not among those who were perplexed about this, and he cut the apparent "Gordian knot" by noting that this phrase did not apply to oxen, since oxen cannot read.

Those who still doubt can apparently find an explanation in the context of the verse quoted by the apostle (Deut. 25:4). This whole chapter contains teachings not about pastoralism, but about human relationships. Therefore, “do not block the mouth of an ox” or “do not put on a muzzle” is a speech image that implies the need for a fair reward for those who work, in this case, in the spiritual field, that is, the very principle that was correctly understood and interpreted as such by Paul. As a parallel, let's cite the proverb: "You can't teach an old dog new tricks," which, of course, does not mean dog obedience.

1 Cor. 9:11. The third illustrative proof comes from verse 10 and the explanation of Deut. 25:4, but it implies the principle of appropriate retribution operating in society: service aimed at the good of society should be rewarded. But if Paul endowed the Corinthians with spiritual riches (1 Corinthians 1:5), the material reward on their part would certainly not correspond to the work done by him. This is why the apostle says that "to shake" their "bodily" things would not be a great reward for him.

1 Cor. 9:12. The fourth point is Paul's reference to other Christian leaders. He had previously mentioned Peter (Cephas; verse 5). Although there is no direct evidence for this, it can be assumed that Peter served the Corinthians for some time (1:12; 3:22; 15:5) and was then in the church's support. The same may be true of Apollos (1:12; 3:4-6,22; 4:6; 16:12). But if the church supported them financially, then the one who founded the church in Corinth, namely the apostle Paul, had the more right to do so.

However, he did not use this right (in the Russian text - "power"; compare 8:9), because he did not want to erect a barrier in the way of the gospel of Christ. If he accepted material rewards for his work, some might regard him as just another itinerant teacher driven by selfish considerations (compare 2 Corinthians 2:17) and would not listen to him. In order not to become a "stumbling block" (1 Cor. 8:9) for anyone, Paul renounced his right to receive material support from those whom he served.

1 Cor. 9:13. So, in the second half of verse 12, Paul emphasizes the reason why he refused to exercise his right to material reward for spiritual work, despite the fact that other worthy servants of Christ (verse 5) used this right. He then moves on to the fifth example, a proof, referring to the practice established for the priesthood in the Old Testament. Priests in those days were supposed to be rewarded for their work at the temple (Num. 18:8-32); by the way, ministers of pagan cults also lived at the expense of temples, about which the Corinthians probably knew better than about what was happening in Old Testament times (1 Cor. 8:10).

1 Cor. 9:14. Point six has the most weight in Paul, for here he refers to the command of Jesus Himself that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel (compare Luke 10:7).

1 Cor. 9:15. Having listed all these proofs, the apostle Paul convincingly substantiated the indisputability of his right to the material support of the Corinthians. However, again (compare verse 12) he emphatically refused it. He pointed out one of the reasons for this in verse 12 - the apostle did not want to give even the slightest reason to accuse him of selfish motives for ministry. Of the second reason, related to the first, he now speaks: it is the desire to show that there is nothing unclean in his commitment to the service of Christ's field (compare 2 Corinthians 11:9-12). This was evidence of the apostle's consecration (his "praise") - voluntary service from the heart (2 Cor. 2:17).

1 Cor. 9:16. Of course, Paul's "calling" to the ministry was very special. Others voluntarily followed the call of God (Mark 3:13; John 1:37-39), but Paul responded to it, being overtaken and smitten by this call (Acts 22:6-10). Like Jonah, he was obliged to preach (1 Cor. 1:17), and woe would be to him if, like the aforementioned prophet, he deviated from the work entrusted to him.

1 Cor. 9:17. The condition For if I do it voluntarily - did not apply to Paul himself, as he said above; therefore, he could not demand any special reward for his work, because he was only fulfilling the ministry entrusted to him (compare Luke 17:10).

1 Cor. 9:18. In English In the text, verse 18 sounds somewhat different and, perhaps, more understandable than in Russian, namely: “What is my reward? for material remuneration) of the preacher".

So did the apostle Paul have no reward? Had, and even two. First, his "praise" (verse 15) from proclaiming the gospel free of charge, and no one could deny it (2 Cor. 11:9-10). Secondly, he had a joyful opportunity to see the gospel in action - among those to whom he preached (1 Cor. 9:19,23), and the results of this action, that is, those who themselves believed in Christ, were his reward (compare 2 Corinthians 7:3-4). The word mistos, translated as "reward", can also mean "pay".

But Paul did not accept material reward, however, he did not remain without a reward, which was expressed in the results of his work. He rejoiced in harvesting for the Lord. For the sake of a more abundant spiritual harvest, he renounced some of his rights, in particular, the right to material reward; on the other hand, his “praise” from the ministry was spotless, and the results of it are evident (compare John 4:36).

1 Cor. 9:19. Paul, figuratively speaking, not only put chains on his right to eat and drink (advising strong believers to do exactly this - 8:9-13), but he applied the same principle to other aspects of his ministry, so that, being free (8:9; 9:1), he voluntarily enslaved himself to everyone (compare Phil. 2:6-7) for the benefit of others (1 Cor. 10:33), whom he wanted to win for Christ (9:22).

1 Cor. 9:20. Although Paul was primarily an apostle to the Gentiles (Gal. 2:8), he never abandoned the thought of saving his own people (Rom. 9:3). It became his custom to seek out a synagogue in every city he went to (Acts 17:2) in order to win Jews (Rom. 1:16). No other verse so clearly emphasizes Paul's own realization of what he was before meeting Christ and became after him. Prior to this meeting, he had been a Jew of the Jews, blameless in terms of legalistic righteousness (Phil. 3:6).

And after her, he became a new man (2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 2:20), who found the righteousness he sought in Christ (Rom. 10:4; 1 Cor. 1:30). He was still a Jew (2 Cor. 11:22; Phil. 3:5), but no longer a legally observant Jew. However, he deliberately obeyed what the doubting Jews followed (eg Acts 21:23-36) in order to get them to listen to the gospel and win them for Christ as a result. However, Paul never compromised on what was at the heart of the gospel: salvation is not acquired by works, but by faith (Gal. 2:16; Eph. law (Gal. 2:4-5).

1 Cor. 9:21. Unlike the Jews, who were "under the law" (verse 20), the Gentiles were "strangers from the law." While among them, Paul did not observe particulars that were obligatory for him in the past, if they were not related to questions of morality, such as eating or not eating things offered to idols (10:27; compare Acts 15:29). And in doing so, he was guided by the same goal - "to acquire foreigners of the law" for Christ. But while Paul was a strong advocate of freedom (Gal. 5:1), he was certainly not an advocate of licentiousness and freethinking (1 Cor. 6:12-20).

He recognized the highest authority over himself, however, not the authority of the Old Testament law. He felt himself subject to God (compare 3:9) and Christ (compare 4:1). And the Holy Spirit gave him the power to fulfill the law of love (Rom. 13:8-10; Gal. 5:13-25), which opposed lawlessness (compare Matt. 24:12, which says that lawlessness weakens love). The law of Christ (Gal. 6:2) commands man to love God and people (Mark 12:30-31), and Paul obeyed this very law (1 Cor. 10:31-33).

1 Cor. 9:22. In referring to unbelieving Jews and Gentiles in the previous verses, Paul is talking about voluntarily restricting his freedom in order to bring the gospel to them. Some theologians believe that the "weak" in this verse refers to both Jews and Gentiles, and unbelievers in Christ. And thus it seems to sum up what Paul said before (compare Rom. 5:6, where the "weak" are called "wicked" in the sense of "godless").

It is more likely, however, that Paul is referring to the weak Corinthians he mentions in 1 Cor. 8:9-11 (compare with "Jews, Greeks and the church of God" in 10:32). The apostle is concerned with "winning the weak" not in the sense of justifying them, as in the case of unbelieving Jews and Gentiles (9:20-21); here we are talking about "acquiring" the members of the Corinthian church in the sense of their sanctification and spiritual growth in Christ (compare Matt. 18:15), and, therefore, about their salvation in the sense that the Lord could invariably work in their lives (compare 1 - Corinthians 5:5; 8:11). Paul's indulgent attitude towards the doubts and customs of all people (compare with the word "from all" in 9:19) was shown in each individual case, because it would be impossible to satisfy the inclinations and ideas of Jews and Gentiles at the same time.

1 Cor. 9:23. In English, the second part of this verse is "so that I may share his blessings." So, Paul voluntarily did all this in order to more people could hear the gospel; the apostle wanted to become "a partner in his" (gospel blessings) as a fellow worker with God (3:9), reaping a joyful harvest from the many souls gained for Christ (John 4:36).

1 Cor. 9:24-25. Such selfless service does not come easy. It requires a great deal of self-discipline ("refraining from everything"), similar to what is needed for an athlete who wants to win in a competition. In order to receive a reward ("crown"), Paul voluntarily renounced a number of privileges that were due to him, which he could have enjoyed with pleasure.

But the reward he longed for was not a “corruptible crown” given by people (in sports games held every two years near Corinth, the winners were decorated with a wreath woven from pine branches), but an incorruptible “crown” bestowed by Christ (3: 13-14; 2 Corinthians 5:10). This “crown” would be for Paul the completion of the reward, which he had already partially enjoyed (interpretation on 1 Cor. 9:18), namely, the opportunity to be glorified before Christ in those whom he managed to acquire for Him (2 Cor. 1 :14; Phil. 2:16; 1 Thessalonians 2:19).

1 Cor. 9:26-27. Paul's statement "to all I have become everything" (verse 22) could be interpreted as evidence of the capitulation of an unscrupulous man. However, it shows just the opposite! For every step he took in continuing this competition was calculated to achieve a reward (compare Phil. 3:13-14).

And his every blow is aimed at the enemy (the devil) in order to take him out of the competition (compare Eph. 6:12; Jas. 4:7). (In the English text, the beginning of verse 26 sounds like “I do not run aimlessly.”) But to achieve this, Paul had to forbid his body to control it (compare 1 Cor. 6:12), sometimes forgoing deserved privileges and even from pleasures that are not at all immoral (8:9) - all this for the achievement of a greater good, namely, the good of others (10:33).

In the competition, Paul was successful and called the rest to join him (the noun from the word keruksaz, translated as preaching, literally means a messenger that calls the participants to the competition - "on the lists"), however, this did not yet guarantee him the final victory. The apostle admitted the possibility that even he might be unworthy (the "crown"). The last three words of verse 27 are rendered in Greek by the single word adokimos, literally "unapproved." In other contexts it refers to the unsaved (eg, Rom. 1:28; Tit. 1:16).

However, here Paul is not referring to salvation, and not even literally a reward. Rather, he is occupied with the very continuation of the competition. As in the case of the brother who indulged in sin (1 Cor. 5:1-5), Paul was not immune from the fact that God would not approve of him and, considering this a disciplinary measure, cut off his life.

After all, for the purpose of education, He punished people in past times (10:6-10), continued to punish them in the present (11:30-32) and will do it in the future (5:5). Paul was worried that some would not be able to say with him that day: “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith” (2 Tim. them out of the competition before it ends.

Comments on Chapter 9

INTRODUCTION TO 1 CORINTHIANS

THE GREAT CORINTH

One glance at the map shows that Corinth was destined for an important place. Southern Greece is almost an island. In the west, the Gulf of Corinth goes deep into the land, and in the east it borders on the Gulf of Sardonic. And now, on this narrow isthmus, between two bays, stands the city of Corinth. This position of the city inevitably led to the fact that Corinth became one of the greatest trading and commercial centers of the ancient world. All communications from Athens and northern Greece to Sparta and the Peloponnesian peninsula passed through Corinth.

Corinth was not only the route of communication between southern and northern Greece, but most of the trade routes from the western Mediterranean to the east. The extreme southern point of Greece was known as Cape Malea (now Cape Matapan). It was a dangerous cape, and "go around Cape Malea" in those days sounded the same as later sounded "go around Cape Horn". The Greeks had two sayings that clearly show their opinion on this: "Let him who swims around Malea forget his home", and "Let him who swims around Malea first make his will."

As a result, sailors chose one of two paths. They went up the Sardonian Gulf and, if their ships were small enough, dragged them across the isthmus and then lowered them into the Gulf of Corinth. The isthmus was called Diolkos - the place through which they drag. If the ship was too large, then the cargo was unloaded, carried by porters across the isthmus to another ship, standing on the other side of the isthmus. These seven kilometers across the isthmus, where the Corinth Canal now passes, shortened the route by 325 km, and eliminated the dangers of traveling around Cape Malea.

It is clear what a major commercial center Corinth was. Communication between southern and northern Greece passed through it. Communication between the eastern and western Mediterranean, even more intensive, was most often carried out through the isthmus. There were three more cities around Corinth: Leheule - off the west coast, Kenchreya - on the east coast, and Scoenus - a short distance from Corinth. Farrar writes: "Luxuries soon appeared in the markets visited by all the peoples of the civilized world - Arabic balsam, Phoenician dates, ivory from Libya, Babylonian carpets, goat's down from Cilicia, wool from Laconia, slaves from Phrygia."

Corinth, as Farrar put it, was the vanity fair of the ancient world. People called it the Greek Bridge, it was also called the Hot Spot of Greece. Someone once said that if a person stands for quite a long time in Piccadilly in London, then he can, in the end, see every inhabitant of the country. Corinth was the Piccadilly of the Mediterranean. In addition to this, the Isthmian Games were also held there, which were second in popularity only to the Olympic Games. Corinth was a wealthy populous city, one of the largest trading centers of the ancient world.

THE DEPEAT OF CORINTH

Corinth gained general fame for its commercial prosperity, but it also became the epitome of immoral life. The very word "corinthian", that is, to live in the Corinthian way, entered into Greek language and meant to lead a drunken and depraved life. This word entered the English language, and during the time of the Regency, the Corinthians were called young people who led a wild and reckless lifestyle. The Greek writer Elian says that if a Corinthian ever appeared on stage in a Greek drama, he must have been drunk. The very name Corinth was synonymous with revelry. The city was a source of evil known throughout the civilized world. The Acropolis hill towered over the isthmus, and on it stood big temple goddess Aphrodite. A thousand priestesses of the goddess Aphrodite lived at the temple, priestesses of love, sacred prostitutes who descended from the Acropolis in the evenings and offered themselves to everyone for money on the streets of Corinth, until the Greeks had a new saying: "Not every man can afford to go to Corinth." In addition to these gross sins, even more refined vices flourished in Corinth, which were brought with them by merchants and sailors from all over the known world at that time. And so Corinth became not only a synonym for wealth and luxury, drunkenness and intemperance, but also a synonym for abomination and debauchery.

HISTORY OF CORINTH

The history of Corinth is divided into two periods. Corinth - ancient city. Thucydides, an ancient Greek historian, claims that the first triremes, Greek warships, were built in Corinth. According to legend, the ship of the Argonauts was also built in Corinth. Argo. But in 235 BC, tragedy struck Corinth. Rome was busy conquering the world. When the Romans tried to conquer Greece, Corinth led the resistance. But the Greeks could not stand against the disciplined and well-organized Roman army, and in the same year, General Lucius Mumius captured Corinth and turned it into a heap of ruins.

But a place with such a geographical position could not be empty forever. Almost exactly one hundred years after the destruction of Corinth, in 35 BC, Julius Caesar rebuilt it from the ruins, and Corinth became a Roman colony. Moreover, it became the capital, the center of the Roman province of Achaia, which included almost all of Greece.

During the time of the Apostle Paul, the population of Corinth was very diverse.

1) Veterans of the Roman army lived in it, who were settled here by Julius Caesar. After serving his term, the soldier received Roman citizenship, after which he was sent to some new city, they gave him a plot of land, so that he settled there. Such Roman colonies were arranged all over the world, and the main backbone of the population in them were veterans of the regular Roman army, who received Roman citizenship for their faithful service.

2) As soon as Corinth was reborn, merchants returned to the city, since its excellent geographical position gave it significant advantages.

3) There were many Jews among the population of Corinth. In the newly built city, excellent commercial prospects opened up, and they were eager to take advantage of them.

4) Small groups of Phoenicians, Phrygians and peoples from the east also lived there, with strange and historical manners. Farrar puts it this way: "This is a mixed and heterogeneous population, consisting of Greek adventurers and Roman townspeople, with a corrupting admixture of Phoenicians. There lived a mass of Jews, retired soldiers, philosophers, merchants, sailors, freedmen, slaves, artisans, merchants, brokers" . He characterizes Corinth as a colony without aristocracy, traditions and authoritative citizens.

And now, knowing that the past of Corinth and its very name were synonymous with wealth and luxury, drunkenness, debauchery and vice, we read 1 Cor. 6,9-10:

“Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God?

Do not be deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor malakias, nor sodomists,

Neither thieves, nor covetous men, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor predators, shall inherit the Kingdom of God."

In this hotbed of vice, in the most seemingly unsuitable city in all of Greece, Paul performed one of his greatest deeds, and in it one of the greatest victories of Christianity was won.

PAUL IN CORINTH

Apart from Ephesus, Paul stayed in Corinth longer than in any other city. With danger to his life, he left Macedonia and moved to Athens. Here he did not achieve much, and therefore he went on to Corinth, where he remained for eighteen months. It will become clearer to us how little we know about his work when we learn that all the events of these eighteen months are summarized in 17 verses. (Acts. 18,1-17).

Upon arrival in Corinth, Paul settled with Aquila and Priscilla. He preached with great success in the synagogue. After the arrival of Timothy and Silas from Macedonia, Paul redoubled his efforts, but the Jews were so hostile and implacable that he had to leave the synagogue. He moved to Justus, who lived next to the synagogue. The most famous of his converts to the faith of Christ was Crispus, the head of the synagogue; and among the people Paul's preaching was also a great success.

In 52, a new governor arrived in Corinth, the Roman Gallio, known for his charm and nobility. The Jews tried to take advantage of his ignorance and kindness and brought Paul to his trial, accusing him of "teaching people to honor God not according to the law." But Gallio, in accordance with the impartiality of Roman justice, refused to examine their accusation and took no action. Therefore, Paul was able to complete his work here and then went to Syria.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH CORINTH

While in Ephesus, Paul learned in 55 that all was not well in Corinth, and so he wrote to the church community there. It is likely that Paul's Corinthian correspondence, which we have, is incomplete and that its layout is broken. It must be remembered that it was not until the year 90 or so that the letters and epistles of Paul were first collected. It seems that they were available in various church communities only on pieces of papyrus and, therefore, it was difficult to collect them. When the letters to the Corinthians were collected, they apparently were not all found, they were not collected completely, and they were not arranged in the original sequence. Let's try to imagine how it all happened.

1) There was a letter written before 1 Corinthians. AT 1 Cor. 5:9 Paul writes, "I wrote to you in a letter not to associate with fornicators." Obviously, this is an indication of a previously written letter. Some scholars believe that this letter has been lost without a trace. Others believe that it is contained in 2 Cor. 6.14-7.1. Indeed, this passage echoes the above theme. In the context of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, this passage is somehow not readable. If we go directly from 2 Cor. 6.13 ko 2 Cor. 7.2, we will see that the meaning and connection are perfectly preserved. Scholars call this passage "The Former Epistle." Initially, the epistles were not divided into chapters and verses. The division into chapters was undertaken no earlier than the thirteenth century, and the division into verses no earlier than the sixteenth. Therefore, the ordering of the collected letters presented great difficulties.

2) Various sources informed Paul that all was not well in Corinth. a) Such information came from Chloe's household ( 1 Cor. 1.11). They reported quarrels tearing apart the church community. b) This news reached Paul and with the arrival of Stephen, Fortunatus and Achaik in Ephesus ( 1 Cor. 16.17). Which personal contacts supplemented the present state of affairs. c) This information came with a letter in which the Corinthian community asked Paul for guidance on various issues. 1 Cor. 7.1 begins with the words "What did you write to me about..." In response to all these messages, Paul wrote the First Epistle to the Corinthians and sent it to the Corinthian church with Timothy ( 1 Cor. 4,17).

3) This epistle caused, however, a further deterioration in relations among the members of the church, and although we do not have written information about this, we can conclude that Paul personally visited Corinth. In 2 Cor. 12:14 we read: "And behold, in third time I'm ready to go to you." 2 Cor. 13,1,2 he writes to them again that he will come to them the third time. Well, if there was a third visit, then there should have been a second. We know only about one, stated in Acts. 18:1-17. We have no record of Paul's second visit to Corinth, but he was only two or three days' sail from Ephesus.

4) This visit did not lead to anything good. Things only escalated, and eventually Paul wrote a stern letter. We learn about him from some passages in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. AT 2 Cor. 2:4 Paul writes: “Out of great sorrow and a troubled heart I wrote to you with many tears…” 2 Cor. 7:8 he writes: "Therefore, if I have saddened you with a message, I do not regret it, although I regretted it; for I see that the message saddened you, however, for a while." This letter, as a result of mental suffering, was so severe that he was saddened to send it.

Scholars call this message Strong message. Do we have it? Obviously, this is not 1 Corinthians, because it is not heartbreaking or painful. It is also evident that at the time of writing this epistle the situation was not hopeless. If, however, we now re-read the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, we will encounter a strange circumstance. From chapters 1-9 one can see a complete reconciliation, but from the 10th chapter there is a sharp change. Chapters 10-13 contain the most heartbreaking thing Paul ever wrote. They clearly show that he was hurt, that he was offended as never before or since. His appearance, his speech, his apostolate, his honor are attacked and criticized.

Most scholars believe that chapters 10-13 are the Stern Epistle, and that it fell into the wrong place when compiling the collection of Paul's epistles. If we want to have an accurate understanding of Paul's correspondence with the Corinthian church, we need to read first chapters 10-13 of the second epistle, and chapters 1-9 after them. We know that Paul sent the Strict Epistle to Corinth with Titus ( 2 Cor. 2, 13; 7,13).

5) Paul was concerned about everything related to this message. He couldn't wait for Titus to return with an answer, so he went to meet him. (2 Cor. 2.13; 7.5.13). He met him somewhere in Macedonia and learned that everything went well and, perhaps in Philippi, he wrote 2 Corinthians chapters 1-9, a letter of reconciliation.

Stalker said that Paul's epistles lifted the veil of obscurity from the early Christian communities, telling us what was going on within them. This statement best characterizes the letters to the Corinthians. Here we see what the words "care for all the churches" meant to Paul. We see both broken hearts and joys here. We see Paul, the shepherd of his flock, taking their worries and sorrows to heart.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH CORINTH

Before proceeding to a detailed analysis of the epistles, let us compile a chronology of correspondence with the Corinthian community.

1) The previous message which, may be, is 2 Cor. 6,4-7,1.

2) The arrival of the household members of Chloe, Stephen, Fortunatus and Achaik and Paul receiving the message of the Corinthian church.

3) In response to all this, the First Epistle to the Corinthians is written. and sent with Timothy to Corinth.

4) The situation worsens even more, and Paul personally visits Corinth. This visit is unsuccessful. It crushed his heart heavily.

5) As a result of this, Paul writes the Stern Epistle, which, probably. composes chapters 10-13 of 2 Corinthians , and was forwarded with Titus.

6) Unable to bear waiting for an answer, Paul sets off to meet Titus. He meets him in Macedonia, learns that everything was formed and, perhaps, in Philippi he writes chapters 1-9 of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A message of reconciliation.

In the first four chapters of the First Epistle to the Corinthians the issue of discrepancies in God's Church in Corinth. Instead of being united in Christ, it was split into sects and parties identifying themselves with various Christian leaders and teachers. It was Paul's teaching that caused this schism, because the Corinthians thought too much about the wisdom and knowledge of man and too little about the pure mercy of God. In reality, despite all their supposed wisdom, they were still in an immature state. They thought they were wise, but in reality they were no better than children.

UNGIVED RIGHTS (1 Cor. 9:1-14)

At first glance it may seem that this chapter is completely unrelated to what was written earlier, but, in fact, it is not. The whole problem was that the Corinthians, who considered themselves mature Christians, claimed that they could eat meat offered to idols. They believed that Christian freedom allows you to do what is not permissible for lesser brothers. To this Paul responds by enumerating privileges which he could have used, but did not use, lest they become a stumbling block to others and a barrier to the gospel of Christ.

First, Paul lays claim to the apostolate, which immediately puts him in a special position. To prove his apostolate, he gives two arguments:

1) He saw the Lord, Jesus Christ. The book of the Acts of the Holy Apostles repeatedly shows that the highest proof of the apostle is that he is a witness of the resurrection of Christ. (Acts. 1, 22; 2.32; 3.15; 4.33). This is a fact of extreme importance. Faith in the New Testament is not just agreement with the dogma, but almost always faith in a person, personified faith. Paul doesn't say, "I know what I believed" and "I know Whom I believed" ( 2 Tim. 1, 12). When Jesus called his disciples, he did not say, “I have created a philosophical system; study it,” or, “I have compiled an ethical system that I invite you to consider,” or, “I invite you to discuss my creed of faith.” He says, "Follow me." All Christianity begins with this personal relationship with Jesus Christ. To be a Christian means to know Him personally. As Carlyle once said at the election of a new priest: "The Church needs a man who knowing Christ not from someone else's hands.

2) Paul states that his evangelism was fruitful. The Corinthians themselves are proof of this. He calls them his seal. When they sent loads of grain, dates, or something else, they put a seal on the vessels in order to testify that they really contained what was said. When a will was made, it was certified with seven seals. It had no legal force if, upon presentation, it did not have seven intact seals. The seal was a guarantee of authenticity. The very fact of the existence of the Corinthian church was a guarantee of Paul's apostolate. The decisive proof that a man knows Christ is his gift of God to bring others to him. It is said that one day a young soldier, lying in the hospital, said to Florence Nightingale, bending over him: "You are my Christ." The best illustration of a man's Christianity is his helping other people to be Christians.

Paul could claim support from the church. This privilege he might expect not only for himself, but also for his wife. Other apostles received it. The Hellenes despised physical labor: not a single free Hellene would volunteer to work. Aristotle stated that people are divided into two classes: the educated and the water-carriers, who exist only to carry out assignments and serve others. He argued that the desire to educate the latter is not only wrong, but also harmful. The enemies of Socrates and Plato, in the literal sense of the word, persecuted them only because they did not take money for education, arguing that it was really not worth paying money for their education. True, every Jewish rabbi had to teach his students for free, and for his livelihood he had to have some kind of craft. But these same rabbis did their best to inspire people that there is no more virtuous deed than to provide him with a livelihood. The best way to secure a comfortable place in heaven - to provide for all the needs of a rabbi, they argued. Paul had every reason to receive material support from the church.

He draws purely human analogies. No warrior serves on his own pay. Why should a warrior of Christ do this? He who plants a vineyard takes a share of its fruit. Why can't the person who has planted churches do the same? The shepherd eats from the flock. Why can't a Christian shepherd do the same? For even in Scripture it is said, "Do not block the mouth of the ox when he is threshing," that is, he should be given grain to eat. (Deut. 25, four). Paul draws an analogy and transfers it to the Christian teacher.

The priest serving at the temple receives his share of the sacrifice. In the Greek sacrifice, as we see, the priest receives the ribs, the thigh, and the left side of the head. It is interesting to know what the priests received at the time Old Testament in the Jerusalem Temple.

There were five main types of sacrifices: 1) Burnt offering. Only this sacrifice was completely burned, except for the stomach, viscera, and tendon of the thigh (cf. Gen. 32.32). But even in this case, the priests received the skin and sold it. 2) Sin offering. In this case, only omentums were burned, and the priests received the remaining meat. 3) Servant of duty. And here only omentums were burned on the altar, and the priests received the rest. four) Bread sacrifice. It consisted of flour, wine and vegetable oil. On the altar, only a small part was sacrificed, and a large part was intended for the priests. 5) Peaceful sacrifice. The omentums and entrails were burned on the altar. The priests received the chest and right thigh, and the rest was returned to the sacrificer.

There were other offerings: 1) Priests received first fruits of seven varieties - wheat, barley, grapevine, fig tree, pomegranate tree, olive tree and honey. 2) Terumakh - the sacrifice of the best fruits of every plant. The priests, on average, were entitled to 1/50 of any crop. 3) Tithing. The Lord followed "every tithe on the earth from the seed of the earth and from the fruits of the tree" (A lion. 27.30). This tenth was given to the Levites, and the priests received a tenth of what the Levites received. four) Shalah - it was a donation of the kneaded dough. If someone kneaded dough from wheat, barley, rye, spelt or oats, he had to give 1/24 share, and 1/48 part to the public baker.

It is against this background that one must consider Paul's refusal to accept from the church even the necessities of life. Paul refused for two reasons: 1) The priests became proverbial. While a simple Jewish family ate meat once a week, the priests suffered from an occupational disease caused by eating too much meat. Their privileges, the luxury of their lives, their gluttony were notorious; Paul knew all this. He knew how often they used religion as a means of gain, and so he decided not to take anything. 2) The second reason for this was his extreme independence. Perhaps he went too far in this, because it seems that the Corinthians were offended by his refusal of all help. But Paul was one of those independent souls who would rather starve to death than be indebted to anyone.

Ultimately, his behavior was determined by one. He would not do anything that would discredit the gospel of Christ or hinder it. People judge the gospel by the life and character of the person who brought it. Paul decided that his hands should be clean. He would not allow anything in his life that was contrary to the gospel coming from his lips. Once a priest was told: "I can't hear what you say when I hear who you are." No one could ever say anything like that to Paul.

PRIVILEGES AND DUTIES (1 Cor. 9:15-23)

Here is a summary of the whole system of preaching that Paul followed.

1) He regards the task of preaching the gospel entrusted to him as privilege. And he decided not to take money for labor for Christ. A well-known American professor, on his retirement, gave a speech in which he thanked the university for having been paid a salary all these years for work that he would have been happy to pay for himself. But this does not mean that a person should always work without remuneration; certain obligations cannot be fulfilled without receiving remuneration for them. But this does not mean that he should work primarily for the sake of money. We must consider our work not as a source of enrichment, but as an opportunity to serve people. It must be remembered that the main duty is not self-gratification, but service for Christ, which Paul regards as a privilege.

2) Paul viewed his preaching as duty. He believed that if he himself decided to become a preacher of the gospel, he could legitimately demand payment for his work. But he did not choose his job, but the job chose him; he also cannot stop it, just as he cannot stop breathing, and therefore there was no question of payment.

Ramon Lull, the great Spanish saint and mystic, tells how he became a missionary. He lived a carefree life full of pleasures and pleasures. And then one day, when he was alone, Christ came, carrying his cross, and asked him: "Carry it for me." But he refused. And another time, when he was in a large quiet cathedral, Christ came and asked him to carry his cross, but he again refused. In a moment of loneliness Christ came for the third time; and this time, says Ramon Lull: "He took his cross and, looking at me, placed it in my hands. What could I do but take it and carry it on?" Paul would have said, "Is there anything else I could do than preach the gospel of Christ?"

3) Despite the denial of wages, Paul knew that every day he received big reward. He rejoiced in the fact that he carried the gospel free of charge to people who would receive it. And eternal is the truth that the real reward for a duty done is not monetary reward, but the satisfaction of a job well done. That is why the main thing in life is not a highly paid job, but one that will give the greatest satisfaction.

Albert Schweitzer describes such a moment that brought him the greatest happiness. A seriously ill patient was taken to his hospital. He calmed the patient, saying that they would give him anesthesia, he would be operated on, and everything would end well. After the operation, the doctor sat down next to the patient, waiting for him to wake up. Finally, the patient opens his eyes and whispers in complete surprise. "Nothing hurts me anymore!" Here is the moment of reward. There was no material reward, but a satisfaction so profound. Isn't it more than a reward?

Fixing a broken life, setting a traveler on the right path, healing a broken heart, bringing someone's soul to Christ - this cannot be compensated with money.

Finally, Paul says how he preaches becoming everything to all people. This does not mean being hypocritical in one with one, and in another with another. On the modern language it means getting along with everyone. A person who sees nothing but his own idea and never even tries to understand the point of view of others can never become a priest, missionary or friend.

Boswell spoke somewhere about "the ability to connect with people." Dr. Johnson possessed just such a capacity, for he not only spoke wonderfully, but also listened well, and had an eminent ability to get along with people. One of his friends said of him that he had the ability to "get people talking about their favorite topics and what they knew best." When one village priest complained about the stupidity of his parishioners, they say, they only talk about calves, he was told that Mr. Johnson would learn to talk about calves. With a villager, he would be a villager. Robert Lind gives examples of Johnson talking to a village priest about a dog's digestive organs, to a farm manager about how to thatch a roof. He could talk about the production of gunpowder, about the malting process, about tanning. At the same time, he emphasizes Johnson's willingness to immerse himself in the interests of the interlocutor and other people. He was a man who enjoyed discussing spectacle technology with an optician, the law with a lawyer, raising pigs with a pig farmer, illness with a doctor, shipbuilding with a shipbuilder. He knew that in conversation it was more blessed to give than to receive.

We can never win anyone's friendship or success in missionary work if we don't talk to people and look into other people's interests. Someone has called teaching, healing, and preaching the "three custodial professions." But if we patronize people and don't try to understand them, we won't be able to get anything positive out of them. Paul, the great preacher who led more people to Christ than anyone else, saw the need to become everything to all people. How important it is to learn how to get along with people, and sometimes we don’t even try to do this.

THE REAL FIGHT. (1 Cor. 9:24-27)

Paul approaches here from a different position. He convinces the Corinthians, who wanted to take the easy way, that without serious self-discipline no one will reach the goal. Pavel has always admired athletes. An athlete who wants to win a competition must train hard; in Corinth they knew how exciting competitions could be, because in Corinth folk festivals were held, second in importance only to the Olympics. Further, the athlete subjects himself to severe self-discipline and training in order to win a laurel wreath that will wither in a few days. How stricter must the self-discipline of a Christian be in order to receive the crown that gives him eternal life.

In this passage, Paul gives something like a summary of the philosophy of life:

1) Life is a struggle. As William James put it: “If this life were not a competition in which victory adds something to the universe, then it would be no better than an amateur performance from which you can leave at any time. But we feel it is like a battle - as if there really is something wild in the universe that we, with all our ideals and faith, must redeem. " And Coleridge put it this way: "The world is not at all a goddess in a skirt, but rather a devil in a tight waistcoat" An indecisive warrior cannot win battles, a trainer who lowers the reins cannot win races We should always feel like we are on a march, people striving forward towards the goal.

2) It takes discipline to win battles and win races. We must subdue our body; little attention is often paid to this in the spiritual life: after all, often spiritual depressions are a consequence of physical weakness. A person who intends to excel trains his body to be in the best physical shape. We must also discipline our mind; it is dangerous if people refuse to think until they are not capable of it at all. Problems are never solved by refusing or running away from them. We must also subdue our souls, facing the dangers of life with calm forbearance and patience, temptations with God-given strength, and disappointments with courage.

3) Know your purpose. How sad that so many people's lives seem to have no purpose. They passively go with the flow of life, instead of going in the appointed direction towards the goal they have set for themselves. Marten Martens has this parable: “Once upon a time there was an old man. When his friends killed him, people came and stood around his body, saying indignantly: “He considered the entire globe to be his soccer ball. And he hit him." "But," said the dead man, opening one eye, "always at the gate." in all directions. "What are they doing?" asked one. "They walk," replies the other. "But where are they going?" asks the first. "Ah," replies the other, "nowhere, they just walk." Such walking will get you nowhere.

4) We must understand the importance of our purpose. The call of Christ very rarely relied on punishment and retribution. It is based on the statement: "Look what you are missing if you do not follow the path I have shown." Target - life eternal, and everything can be done to achieve this goal.

5) We cannot save others if we do not own ourselves. Freud once said: "Psychoanalysis is primarily studied on oneself, studying one's personality." The Greeks declared that the first rule of life is: "Man, know thyself." Indeed, it is impossible to serve others if we do not master ourselves; we cannot teach what we ourselves do not know; we cannot lead anyone to Christ if we ourselves have not found Him.

Commentary (introduction) to the entire book of 1 Corinthians

Comments on Chapter 9

A piece of church history like no other. Weisecker

Introduction

I. SPECIAL STATEMENT IN THE CANON

The first epistle to the Corinthians is a "book of problems" in the sense that Paul deals with the problems ("As for...") that faced the congregation in the evil city of Corinth. As such, the book is especially needed in today's troubled churches. Separation, hero-worship of leaders, immorality, disputes about the law, marriage problems, questionable practices, and prescriptions for spiritual gifts are all dealt with here. However, it would be wrong to think that the whole book is devoted to problems! In the same Epistle there is the most beautiful work about love, not only in the Bible, but in all world literature (ch. 13); wonderful teaching about the resurrection - both Christ's and ours (ch. 15); teachings about the sacrament (ch. 11); the commandment to take part in material donations. Without this Message, we would be much poorer. It is a treasure trove of practical Christian teaching.

All scholars agree that the First Epistle to the Corinthians we have named came from the pen of Paul. Some (mainly liberal) researchers believe that there are some "foreign inserts" in the letter, but these subjective assumptions are not supported by manuscript evidence. 1 Corinthians 5:9 seems to refer to a previous (non-canonical) letter from Paul that was misunderstood by the Corinthians.

External evidence in favor of 1 Corinthians very early. Clement of Rome (c. 95 AD) speaks of the book as "an epistle from the blessed apostle Paul." The book was also quoted by such early church authors as Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian. It is listed in the Muratorian canon and follows the Epistle to the Galatians in Marcion's heretical canon Apostolikon.

Internal evidence also very strong. Besides the fact that the author calls himself Paul in 1:1 and 16:21, his arguments in 1:12-17; 3:4.6.22 also prove Paul's authorship. Coincidences with Acts and other writings of Paul, and a strong spirit of sincere apostolic concern rule out forgery and make the arguments for the authenticity of his authorship more than sufficient.

III. WRITING TIME

Paul tells us that he is writing from Ephesus (16:8-9, cf. v. 19). Since he labored there for three years, it is likely that 1 Corinthians was written in the latter half of this long ministry, that is, sometime around A.D. 55 or 56. e. Some scholars date the Epistle even earlier.

IV. PURPOSE OF WRITING AND THEME

Ancient Corinth was (and is) in southern Greece, west of Athens. In Paul's time, its location was advantageous: trade routes passed through the city. It became a major center of international trade, with a lot of transport coming to it. Since the religion of the people was perverted, the city soon became the center of the worst forms of immorality, so that the very name "Corinth" became the personification of everything impure and sensual. It had a reputation for being so lecherous that it even had a new verb "korinthiazomai", meaning "lead a vicious life".

The Apostle Paul first visited Corinth during his second missionary journey (Acts 18). At first he, with Priscilla and Aquila, who, like him, made tents, worked among the Jews. But when the majority of the Jews rejected his preaching, he turned to the Corinthian pagans. Souls were saved by preaching the gospel, and a new church was formed.

About three years later, when Paul was preaching in Ephesus, he received a letter from Corinth reporting serious problems facing the community. The letter also asked various questions about Christian life. In response to this letter, he wrote the First Epistle to the Corinthians.

The theme of the Epistle is how to correct the worldly and carnal church, which is frivolous about those mindsets, mistakes and actions that so disturbed the apostle Paul. In Moffatt's apt phrase, "the church was in the world, as it should be, but the world was in the church, which should not be."

Because this situation is still not uncommon in some communities, the meaning of 1 Corinthians remains enduring.

Plan

I. INTRODUCTION (1:1-9)

A. Greeting (1.1-3)

B. Thanksgiving (1:4-9)

II. TROUBLES IN THE CHURCH (1.10 - 6.20)

A. Divisions among believers (1:10 - 4:21)

B. Immorality Among Believers (Ch. 5)

C. Litigation between believers (6:1-11)

D. Moral licentiousness among believers (6:12-20)

III. THE APOSTLE'S ANSWER TO QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CHURCH (Ch. 7 - 14)

A. About marriage and celibacy (Ch. 7)

B. About food offered to idols (8:1 - 11:1)

C. About the Veil for Women (11:2-16)

D. Of the Lord's Supper (11:17-34)

E. About the Gifts of the Spirit and Their Use in the Church (Ch. 12-14)

IV. PAUL'S RESPONSE TO THE RESURRECTION DENIAL (Ch. 15)

A. Certainty of the Resurrection (15:1-34)

B. Refutation of the arguments against the resurrection (15:35-57)

C. Closing Appeal in the Light of the Resurrection (15:58)

V. FINAL INSTRUCTIONS (Ch. 16)

A. About fees (16:1-4)

B. About your personal plans (16:5-9)

C. Closing Instructions and Greetings (16:10-24)

9,1 As we know, there were those among the Corinthians who doubted the authority of Paul. They said that he was not one of the Twelve, and therefore not a real apostle. Paul declares that he is free from human influence, as a true apostle Lord Jesus. He bases this assertion on two facts. First, he saw Jesus Christ our Lord, resurrected. It happened on the way to Damascus. He also points to the Corinthians themselves as proof of his apostolate, asking them: "Are you not my business in the Lord?" If they doubt his apostolate, they should examine themselves. Are they saved? Of course they will say yes. Okay, but who led them to Christ? Apostle Paul! Therefore, they themselves are proof of the fact that he is a true apostle of the Lord.

9,2 Other may not recognize it apostle but the Corinthians certainly should. They are - seal his apostolate in the Lord.

9,3 Verse 3 probably refers to the previous part of the chapter, not the next part. Paul says here that what he has just said is defense against condemners him or against those who doubted his apostolic authority.

9,4 In verses 4-14, Paul speaks of his apostolic right to financial support. As an ambassador of the Lord Jesus, Paul was entitled to material rewards from believers. However, he did not always insist on this right. He often worked with his hands, making tents, in order to be able to freely preach the gospel to people. No doubt his critics took advantage of this by suggesting that he did not accept content because he was not a true apostle.

He starts this thread with a question: "Or do we not have the power to eat and drink?"- that is, so that we do not have to earn money for it? Don't we have a right to maintenance from the Church?

9,5 Or do we not have the power to have a sister wife as a companion, like the other apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? Perhaps some of Paul's critics believed that he did not marry, knowing that the Church would never take him and his wife for their support. Peter and the other apostles were married, as were brothers of the Lord. Here the apostle asserts that he has exactly the same right to marry and enjoy the material support of Christians both for himself and for his wife. Expression "to have a sister's wife as a companion"(that is, a believing wife) refers not only to the right to marry, but also to the right of both to live on a church support. Brothers of the Lord- these are, apparently, His half-brothers or cousins. This text alone does not solve this problem, although other passages of Scripture say that Mary had other children after Jesus, her firstborn (Luke 2:7; see Matt. 1:25; 12:46; 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 2:12; Gal. 1:19).

9,6 Apparently Barnabas, like Paul, preached the gospel and worked to provide for himself. Paul asks: do they not have authorities do not work, to be cared for by the children of God?

9,7 First, the apostle supports his content claim by referring to other apostles. Now he's arguing from the realm human activity. The soldier does not serve in the army on your content. From the person who planted grape, do not expect that he will not hope for a reward from its fruits. Finally, the shepherd is not required to feed herd without the right to drink milk. Christian service is akin to warfare, farming, and shepherd life. It consists of fighting the enemy, taking care of God's fruit trees, and serving as a shepherd among His sheep. If the right to pay is recognized in these earthly occupations, how much more must it be in the service of the Lord!

9,8 Paul then turns to the OT, from which he draws further evidence of his status. Should he use worldly pursuits - war, agriculture and shepherding - to argue? Isn't it the same most He speaks Scripture?

9,9 Deuteronomy 25:4 clearly states that not must wear a muzzle threshing ox. That is, the animal working in the harvest should be allowed to eat some of the harvest. Does God care about oxen? God cares about oxen, but it is unlikely that He wrote these words in the OT for the sake of senseless animals. Here is a spiritual principle that we need to apply in our lives and ministries.

9,10 Or, of course, for us it is said? The answer is yes, it is our well-being that He had in mind when He wrote these words. When a person plows, he gotta plow with the expectation of some kind of reward. Likewise, when a person threshes, he has a right to expect to receive some part of the harvest as a reward. Christian service is like plowing and threshing, and God has indicated that those who carry out this service should not do it at their own expense.

9,11 Paul says that in the Christians of Corinth he sowed the spiritual. In other words, he came to Corinth preaching the gospel and teaching the Corinthians precious spiritual truths. Would it be too much if they, in turn, repaid him with some part of the money or other bodily, i.e. material. His argument here is this: "The preacher's pay is far inferior in value to what he gave. Material goods are worthless compared to spiritual goods."

9,12 Paul knew that the church at Corinth contained others preachers and teachers. The believers acknowledged their obligations towards them, but not towards the apostle Paul, and therefore he asks: "If others have power over you, do we not?" If the Corinthians recognized the rights of others to maintenance, why would they not recognize that he, their father in faith, also has this right? Undoubtedly, some of those who received support were teachers of the Jewish persuasion. Paul adds that although he had such power, or such a right, he did not take advantage of this with the Corinthians, but endured everything, so as not to put any obstacle to the gospel of Christ. Instead of insisting on his right to receive support from them, he endured all the hardships and hardships so as not to interfere with the gospel.

9,13 Paul then gives the example of the Jewish temple ministers who are also supported.

Those who performed official duties related to the temple service were supported by income from the temple. In this sense they fed from the temple. And the priests themselves serving the altar received a certain portion share of the altar. In other words, both the Levites, who had daily duties in the temple, and the priests, who were entrusted with more sacred tasks, were equally rewarded for their service.

9,14 Finally, Paul gives a clear command from Himself Lord. He commanded those who preach the gospel to live from the gospel. This alone is the final proof of Paul's right to receive maintenance from the Corinthians. But then the question arises: why didn't he insist on it? The answer is given in verses 15-18.

9,15 He explains that did not use anything that is, he did not insist on his rights. And wrote he is not now so that they send him money. He's more ready to die rather than for someone to destroy his praise.

9,16 Paul says he can't brag by preaching the gospel. This necessary duty entrusted to him by God. He did not choose this kind of activity for himself. He was given a task, and he would be the most miserable of people if he did not fulfill the Divine commission. This does not mean that the apostle did not want to preach the gospel; in this case, the decision to preach was not made by him, but by the Lord.

9,17 As the apostle Paul preached the gospel voluntarily, he should have been have an award for this service, that is, the right to maintenance. Both the Old and New Testaments clearly state that those who serve God can receive material support from God's people. Here Paul does not mean that he does not serve the Lord willingly; he simply claims that there was a divine impulse in his apostolate. He emphasizes this in the last part of the verse. If a did he preach not voluntarily that is, because fire was burning from within him and he could not avoid preaching, then he was service entrusted. He was a man acting on orders, and therefore he could not boast of it. Everyone recognizes verse 17 as difficult, and yet its meaning seems to be this: Paul does not use his right to live on the support of the Corinthians because he did not choose this ministry for himself. The hand of God led him to this. The false teachers in Corinth could claim the material support of the saints, but the apostle Paul will seek his reward elsewhere.

Knox's translation of the verse reads: "I can claim a reward for what I do of my own choosing; but when I act under compulsion, I am only doing a commission."

Ryri comments:

"Paul could not shirk his duty to preach the gospel, because this ministry (duty) was entrusted to him, and he obeyed the command to preach, although he was not paid (cf. Luke 17:10)".(Charles C. Ryrie, The Ryrie Study Bible, New King James Version, p. 1771.)

9,18 If he could not boast that he was preaching the gospel, then why boast? By what was his own choice, namely: he proclaimed the gospel of Christ free of charge. He made the decision to do it himself. He will preach the gospel to the Corinthians while at the same time earning a living on his own so as not to exercise his right to support in the gospel.

Summing up the arguments of the apostle presented here, we note that he draws a line between obligatory and optional. There is no reluctance in his preaching of the gospel. He did it with joy. But at the same time, this great duty was entrusted to him. Therefore, he could not boast of the fulfillment of this duty. While preaching the gospel, he could have insisted on his right to receive maintenance, but he did not; he decided to preach the gospel to the Corinthians free of charge.

And since it was his own will, he could be proud of it. As we have assumed, Paul's critics argued that he made tents because he did not consider himself a true apostle. Here Paul speaks of earning his own living, and thus proves that his apostolate is, nevertheless, valid; in fact, it is distinguished by grandeur and nobility.

In verses 19-22, Paul uses himself as an example of giving up legal rights for the sake of the gospel. As we study this section, it is important to remember that Paul does not mean here that he ever sacrificed important principles of Scripture. He did not believe that the end justifies the means. In these verses, he is talking about something that has no moral significance. He adapted himself to the customs and habits of the people he worked with in order to be able to find ears ready to listen to the Good News. But he never allowed anything that would make him compromise with gospel truth.

9,19 On the one hand, he was free from everyone. No one could force him, no one had power over him. And yet he enslaved himself everyone people to buy more. If he could make concessions without sacrificing divine truth, he did so to bring souls to Christ.

9,20 To the Jews he was like a Jew in order to win the Jews. This cannot mean that he again submitted himself to the law of Moses for the salvation of the Jews. The true meaning of this verse is shown in the actions that Paul took in connection with the circumcision of Timothy and Titus. In the case of Titus, there were people who insisted that without circumcision he could not be saved. Realizing that they were opposed to the gospel of the grace of God, Paul was categorically against the circumcision of Titus (Gal. 2:3). But in the case of Timothy, such questions do not seem to have arisen.

Therefore, the apostle readily admitted that Timothy should be circumcised if it would help to spread the gospel more widely (Acts 16:3).

(In some Greek manuscripts, the explanation is added here: "although I myself am not subject to the law.") Bylaws are the Jews. But in the first part of the verse, Paul already spoke of dealing with the Jews. Why then does it repeat itself? This is often explained by the fact that when he speaks of the Jews in the first part of the verse, he means their national customs, while here he refers to their religious life.

A brief explanation is needed here. As a Jew, Paul was born under the law. He tried to win God's favor by keeping the law, but found himself unable to keep it. The law only showed him what a hopeless sinner he was and condemned him completely. Gradually, he realized that the law is not the way of salvation, but the method by which God shows man his sinfulness and need for a Savior. Paul then trusted the Lord Jesus Christ and, in doing so, was freed from the condemning voice of the law. The Lord Jesus suffered punishment for the law he had broken on the cross of Golgotha.

After the conversion, the apostle realized that the law is not the way of salvation and not the rules according to which the saved should live. The believer does not live under law, but under grace. This does not mean that he can go and do whatever he wants. Here, rather, it means that the true sense of the grace of God will keep him even from the desire to do illegal things. The Spirit of God dwells in the Christian, raising him to a new level of behavior. Now he wants to live holy, not out of fear of punishment for violating the law, but out of love for Christ, who died for him and rose again. Under law, man's actions are motivated by fear, but under grace, he is motivated by love. Love is a motive much higher than fear. People will do for love what they will never do out of fear.

Arnot says:

"God keeps souls in obedience in the same way that He keeps the planets in their orbits - letting them go free. There is no visible chain on which these radiant worlds would be planted so that they would not scatter from the center. They are firmly held by an invisible principle. And it is this invisible bond of love—the love of the Lord who redeemed them—that keeps redeemed people to live soberly, righteously, and godly.”(William Arnot, The Church in the House, pp. 467, 468.)

With that in mind, let's go back to the last part of verse 20. For those under the law, he was like under the law, in order to acquire those under the law. When Paul was among the Jews, he behaved like a Jew where it had no moral significance. For example, he ate the same as the Jews and abstained from pork, which they were forbidden to eat.

Perhaps Paul also refrained from working on the Sabbath day, realizing that in doing so, he could attract more people who were ready to listen to the gospel.

The Apostle Paul was born again in the Lord Jesus, and the law, as a rule of life, no longer weighed on him. He only adapted to the customs, habits and prejudices of people in order to bring them to the Lord.

9,21 Ryri writes:

"Here Paul shows no duplicity, but constant strict self-discipline in order to serve the most different people. Just as a stream directed along a narrow channel is stronger than an endless swampy swamp, so limited freedom makes the testimony of Christ more convincing.(Charles C. Ryrie, The Grace Of God, p. 83.)

For strangers to the law Paul acted like alien to the law(although he not was alien to the law before God, but under the law to Christ). alien to the law- these are not rebels or robbers who do not recognize any laws, but the general definition of pagans. The law as such was given to the Jewish people, not to the Gentiles. Thus, when Paul was among the Gentiles, he behaved according to their habits and feelings, as far as possible, while remaining faithful to the Savior. The apostle explained that even by doing as alien to the law he was nevertheless not a stranger to the law before God. He did not consider himself free to do anything, but was subordinated to Christ. In other words, he had to love and honor the Lord Jesus, serve and please Him, but now not according to the law of Moses, but according to the law of love. He was under the law of Christ. There is a proverb in English: "When you are in Rome, do as the Romans do." Paul is saying here that when he was with the Gentiles, he adjusted to their way of life as much as he could while remaining faithful to Christ. But we must remember that this is about cultural differences, not about doctrine or morality.

9,22 Verse 22 talks about infirm, or overly sensitive. Such people are too sensitive in matters of no fundamental importance. For the weak Paul was as weak as to gain them. (Some Greek manuscripts omit the word "like" ("as weak"), but it seems to be quite important in Paul's argument: he did not become really infirm.) If necessary, he could be a vegetarian so as not to offend them by eating meat. In short, Paul He became everything to all, in order to save at least some. These verses can never justify sacrificing the principles of Scripture.

They only express their readiness to adapt to the customs and habits of people in order for them to hear the Good News of salvation. When Paul says: "to save at least some", he does not for a moment admit the thought that he himself can save another person, because he understands that the only one who can save is the Lord Jesus. At the same time, it is remarkable to note that the heralds of Christ are so identified with Him that He even allows them to describe the work they do with the word "save". How much it uplifts, ennobles, and exalts the ministry of the gospel!

Verses 23-27 speak of the danger of losing your reward through lack of self-discipline. For Paul, giving up maintenance at the expense of the Corinthians was a form of severe discipline.

9,23 I do this for the sake of the Gospel, that I may be a partaker of it. In previous verses, Paul described how he submitted his rights and desires to the work of the Lord. Why did he do it? He did it for the gospel for to to have the right to share in the triumph of the gospel in the coming day.

9,24 When Paul wrote the words of verse 24, he was no doubt referring to the Isthmian Games, which were held near Corinth. The Corinthian believers were well acquainted with these athletic contests.

Paul reminds them that although many they run on the lists, not everyone gets reward. The Christian life is like a contest. It requires self-discipline. It requires strenuous effort. It requires clarity of purpose. However, the verse does not suggest that in a Christian contest only one will be rewarded. He teaches that we must all come to the finish line as winners.

We must all learn the selflessness that the apostle Paul himself possessed. Here, of course, the prize is not salvation, but a reward for faithful service.

Nowhere is it said that salvation is the result of our faithfulness in this contest. Salvation is a gift of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

9,25 Now Paul moves from running to wrestling. He reminds readers that all the ascetics or participants in sports, control themselves in everything. A wrestler once asked a coach, "Can't you drink and smoke and have fun and still wrestle?"

The coach replied: "You can, but you can't win!" Pavel, thinking of the competitors, sees the winner stepping forward to receive his reward. What is she? it crown of perishable- a garland of flowers or a wreath of leaves that will soon wither. But Paul compares the crown imperishable, which will be rewarded to those who faithfully served Christ.

For this crown of life and glory
We are grateful to You.
Who will neglect the Unearthly wreath -
Reward in mortal combat
Eternal and indestructible
Like a throne, like a kingdom of God
And His incarnate Son!

(Horace Bonard)

9,26 Seeing this imperishable crown ahead, Paul claims to be running not like the wrong one, and beats not so much to just beat the air. His ministry was neither useless nor fruitless. Before him, he saw a clearly defined goal and intended to approach its achievement with each of his actions. You can't waste your time and energy. The apostle did not want to miss the target.

9,27 Instead, he disciplined his body and enslaved his, lest, while preaching to others, you yourself be unworthy, not be rejected. The Christian life requires self-control, moderation, self-discipline. We must learn to control ourselves. The apostle Paul recognized the terrible opportunity to stay unworthy after myself preached to others. Much has been argued about the meaning of this verse. Some see it as teaching that a person can be saved and then lose it.

This, of course, contradicts common doctrine NT that not one of Christ's sheep will perish. Others say that the word translated as "unworthy",- a very weighty word that refers to eternal damnation. ( Big problems causes how the word is translated adokimos("unworthy" in the Synodal translation). The word simply means "unapproved." As a sports term, it translates well modern word"disqualified".)

However, they interpret this verse as follows: Paul does not teach here that a person already saved can be unworthy; he simply says that he who has not been able to discipline himself has never been saved. Thinking of false teachers who excused every passion and inclination, Paul advances the general principle that if a person does not keep his body in subjection, this proves that he has not really been regenerated, and although he may be preaching to others, he himself will be abandoned. as unworthy.

The third explanation is that Paul is not talking here about salvation, but about service. It suggests the possibility of not losing salvation, rather than passing the test of one's ministry, being rejected and not being rewarded. This interpretation corresponds to the meaning of the word "unworthy" and context of athletic competition. Paul recognizes the terrible possibility that, preaching to others himself may be suspended and no longer fit for the Lord.

In any case, this passage is extremely serious and should make everyone who wants to serve the Lord Christ look into the depths of his heart. Each must make a choice for himself, so that, by the grace of God, he will never have to learn the meaning of this word by experience.

Reflecting on the need for self-control, Paul returns to the history of the Israelites. In chapter 10, he recalls how the Israelites began to become self-indulgent, careless about the bridle of their bodies, and therefore became unworthy and fell out of favor with God.

He speaks first of Israel's privileges (vv. 1-4), then of Israel's punishment (v. 5), and finally of the causes of Israel's fall (v. 6-10). After all, he explains how this applies to us (vv. 11-13).