|
We could restate the principle like this: a believer should relinquish the exercise of any and every right he has in Christ if that right is detrimental to another believer or a hindrance to an unbeliever coming to Christ. Paul taught this principle to the Corinthians in chapter 8. In response to their question, he told them they had every right to eat meat that had been offered in a sacrifice to an idol. But he added that if eating that meat would be detrimental to another believer by causing him to stumble or to be offended, then the stronger believer ought not to exercise his right. A believer's rights are to be limited if they will harm another believer's spiritual walk, or hinder an unbeliever's openess to the gospel message.
In 1 Corinthians 9 Paul applied the principle of limited liberty to his own life to give a personal illustration of this principle. As an apostle of Jesus Christ, Paul had the right to be financially and materially supported by the Christian church. Paul very clearly established that right in the first fourteen verses of chapter eight. He appealed to six different areas to prove the legitimacy of his right of support: custom, Old Testament precept, community justice, precedent, the priesthood, and Christ's command. Paul established beyond question the clear principle that a Christian worker has the right to be supported materially by the church.
After he established his right, in 1 Corinthians 9:15-27 Paul gave two reasons why he relinquished his right to be financially supported by the Corinthians. First, he did not want to lose his reward that he earned by preaching the gospel without charge. Second, and more importantly, he wanted to be sure that absolutely nothing would hinder reaching the lost with the gospel. After establishing his right to be paid for his work he says:
By beginning this section with the word 'but' Paul introduces a contrast between his rights and his actions. He did not use the right that he had, nor did he intend to. Paul had worked at tentmaking with Aquilla and Priscilla when he first came to Corinth. He earned his own way while preaching every Sabbath in the synagogue (Acts 18:1-4). Paul evidently did the same thing when he started the Thessalonian church:
Paul made sure that no one thought his discussion of his rights was a hint: "Nor have I written these things that it should be done so to me". Why didn't Paul want their support?
He said at the end of verse 15, "For it would be better for me to die than that anyone should make my boasting void". Paul's boasting was in the fact that the gospel was preached free of charge. That eliminated any possible suspicion of Paul's motives: he would have died of hunger rather than hinder the gospel. Paul had critics in Corinth. One possible criticism that could have been legitimately raised against Paul is a commonplace criticism today: "He's in it for the money. His motive is purely mercenary." Paul said that he wanted to have a proof of his integrity for his critics. What was the proof of his integrity? He said that merely preaching the gospel did not prove his integrity in verse 16:
How did preaching the gospel without charge prove Paul's integrity? When a doctor cares for an ill patient, his care and professional service are not proof of his integrity. He proves his integrity by caring for a patient that cannot pay him. In a similar way, Paul could not boast in his preaching because it was only the service he owed God, the responsibility his Master had given him. "Woe is me if I do not preach the gospel." Like Jonah, Paul was compelled to preach. And like Jonah, any failure on Paul's part to obey that call would result in serious chastisement. But it was not Paul's duty to minister without pay; on the contrary, he had every right to be supported by the churches. Serving without charge was Paul's way of freely offering to God more than had been demanded of him. His joy came from seeing that his ministry became even more effective in winning men to Christ through such sacrifice. The proof of Paul's integrity was that he preached the gospel freely because that was an optional thing in his life.
Paul's relinquishing of his right involved a sacrifice on his part. He explained further in verse 17:
Paul emphasized the difference between doing something that is an option and doing something as an obligation. 1 Corinthians 9:17 is clearer in the NIV: "If I preach voluntarily, I have a reward; if not voluntarily, I am simply discharging the trust committed to me." Preaching the gospel was not option for Paul, it was a duty.
Paul said, "I have been entrusted with a stewardship." The word stewardship is the Greek word oikonomia which means "stewardship" or "household management". A steward was commonly a slave. There is a difference between what a slave does in obedience to a command and what a man volunteers to do of his own accord. Luke 17:10 puts it this way, "So likewise you, when you have done all those things which you are commanded, say, 'We are unprofitable servants. We have done what was our duty to do'". Paul was called on the road to Damascus and given a duty to preach the gospel. But it was his choice to preach it freely. He chose not to exercise his right to be supported by preaching the gospel. Paul chose to preach it freely in order to have a reward according to 9:18.
Paul's reward was twofold. First, he had the joy of preaching the gospel without charge. Secondly, since he didn't abuse his right to receive pay, his motives were not open to criticism. Paul did not want new converts or potential converts to have reason to think he was preaching the gospel for money. This policy was especially significant for Paul's work, because he, more than any other apostle, worked in areas where the gospel had not been preached.
Preaching without pay is not the proof of integrity for every preacher. But I do think this principle should be applied to all those who are involved in an evangelistic ministry. Those who are involved in evangelism should not try to be supported by the people they are trying to reach.
We cannot directly apply the idea of a preacher's reward being linked to his preaching without material support to any preacher today. No one today is compelled to preach the gospel as Paul was. Paul was compelled by a supernatural vision of the ascended Christ to preach the gospel. I don't know of any preacher today who is compelled to preach by a supernatural vision of the resurrected Christ; preachers preach optionally today. Therefore, their preaching is the basis of their reward.
A second possible misunderstanding sometimes emerges from these verses in 1 Corinthians 9. These verses do not teach that every Christian is obligated to be an evangelist. To use these verses to say that all believers are obligated to be an evangelist is to misinterpret them. Not every believer is called to the work of evangelism. The misuse of these verses has caused great guilt to many believers. Many believers become involved in an evangelism program out of guilt. Don't misunderstand me: every believer is to be a witness for Jesus Christ. We are all to be salt and light. We are always to be ready to use every opportunity to witness for Christ. But every believer is not an evangelist. Only some are:
The compulsion that Paul had to preach the gospel applied only to himself. His compulsion was a result of the supernatural vision and calling that was given to him.
The principle in these verses is clear. Paul relinquished his right to financial support so that he would not cause anyone in Corinth to stumble or to accuse him of mercenary motives in his service for the Lord. Paul practiced what he preached. He lived out the principle of relinquishing one's rights that he taught to the Corinthians.
How far should a believer go to live out this principle? Couldn't it be carried to extremes? It amazing to see how far Paul was willing to carry out this principle. In verses 19-23 Paul carried the principle to an extreme that surprises many of us today. He extended the principle to apply to every right that is related to his purpose and calling and service for God. Notice how he expresses the principle generally in verse 19: "For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more."
Paul was a free man: he was under no obligation to any individual, he was not compelled by any board of directors or elders to conduct his life in a certain fashion. Paul was a free man. Yet in that free status he made himself a slave. The Greek word Paul used for slave is douloo which means to enslave, to bring into (be under) bondage. The word slave is very strong. It is used to describe Israel's 400 year experience in Egypt (Acts 7:6), and the marriage bond (1 Cor. 7:15). By calling himself a slave, Paul said that he had relinquished all of his rights and put himself in slavery to all other men.
Why did Paul enslave himself to other men? "That I might win the more." He wanted to win more people Jesus Christ. Was Paul an Armenian? Didn't Paul understand the doctrine of election and the sovereignty of God in salvation? Didn't he know that God saves men? How could he say, "That I might win the more?" What did he mean? I believe that Paul understood the sovereignty of God better that any other man ever did. Paul was not confused in his theology.
Paul understood the truth of Acts 13:48:
Faith is not the cause of the new birth but the consequence of it. If the unsaved man could of himself exercise faith he could please God, but Paul taught in Romans 8:8 that "those who are in the flesh [unsaved] cannot please God." The natural man cannot please God. Paul also taught this truth in 1 Corinthians 2:14:
Paul knew and taught that a man cannot come to God unless God first regenerates him. Paul clearly understood the sovereignty of God in salvation but he also understood that God fulfills His purposes and his will through the co-operation of men. Paul wanted to be used of God in bringing men to salvation.
Scripture has many examples of how the actions of men work in harmony with the sovereign plans of God.
Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, became king after his father's death. The people asked Rehoboam to lighten their burden. Rehoboam was counseled by the elders to lighten the burden, but he was counseled by his peers to increase the burden. He listened to his peers and increased the burden on the people. This caused Israel to split. Jeroboam became king of the Northern kingdom which consisted of ten tribes and Rehoboam ruled over the Southern kingdom of Judah.
2 Chronicles 10:15 says, "So the king did not listen to the people". When Rehoboam followed cruel and foolish advice, and when the northern tribal leaders revolted against him, they each acted as free agents obeying their own will and passions. But God intended the split of Israel as a punishment on the house of David because Solomon fell into worshiping other gods.
1 Kings 11:15 goes on to say, "That the Lord might perform his word, which he
spake by the hand of Ahijah."
1 Kings 11:30-31 (NKJV) "Then Ahijah took hold of the new
garment that was on him, and tore it into twelve pieces. And
he said to Jeroboam, "Take for yourself ten pieces, for thus
says the LORD, the God of Israel: 'Behold, I will tear the kingdom
out of the hand of Solomon and will give ten tribes to
you."
Israel's revolt demonstrates the sovereign rule of God over the successes and failures of kingdoms. But it also demonstrates the sovereignty of God working through the instrumentation of human passions in the natural course of events. The Sovereign God uses means to accomplish His end. God has decreed that certain events shall come to pass as well as the means for their accomplishment. God has elected certain people to be saved, but he has also decreed that they will be saved through the preaching of the gospel. Paul saw himself as a means in the sovereign purpose of God to bring men to salvation, and he worked to that end.
Paul gave up his rights in order to be fully effective in his calling of evangelism. Paul laid aside everything and anything that would hinder his effectiveness for the Lord. His goal in life was to be God's instrument. He lived each moment for the Lord, not for himself.
How could Paul save more men by relinquishing his rights? He gave three illustrations in 1 Corinthians 9:20-22.
The illustration that Paul gave was his ministry to those who were under the Old Testament Mosaic Law, the Jews. In order to be an effective witness to the Jews he became a Jew. He put himself under the customs and prejudices of the Jews in order to be acceptable to the Jews and gain a hearing so that he could win them to Jesus Christ. For instance, Paul had Timothy circumcised. Circumcision was a matter of liberty as we saw in 1 Corinthians 7:19: "Circumcision is nothing..." But Paul had Timothy circumcised so that they could approach the Jews who were very sensitive about circumcision since it was part of their Old Testament law. If a believer today is trying to reach a person who is under some legalistic way of life, the believer should be accommodating to the unbeliever. If a believer offends the people he tries to reach, he certainly will not gain a hearing from them.
Paul did the same thing with the Gentiles:
In order to reach gentiles who did not know or follow the Jewish law given by God, Paul was "as without law". Paul did not urge the Gentiles to keep the customs and obey the regulations of the Jewish law. Rather, he emphasized the necessity of faith in Christ (Gal. 3:2). An example of Paul's adaptation to gentiles is seen at Athens where he copied the Greek manner of speaking and quoted Greek poets to support his argument (Acts 17:28).
Paul wanted to be clear about which laws he was under, so he said, "Being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ". While Paul was free from the outward, ceremonial law, he was subject to a new, inward principle which governed his life. Since Christ fulfilled the Law for us, we are responsible not to the Law but to Christ. We are like parts of the body controlled by the head (1 Cor. 7:22; Rom. 8:1-4; 1 Pet. 2:16). The law of Christ is the law of love which fulfills the kernel of the old, outward law: love for God and neighbor.
A third group that Paul relinquished his rights in order to reach was the weak: "To the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak" (1 Corinthians 9:22). In this statement, Paul applied the argument of 9:19-21 to the problem of 1 Corinthians 8. To weak and inexperienced Christians who had not practically applied their freedom in Christ to their lives, and who allowed insignificant questions (such as whether to eat meat offered to idols) to become major obstacles to their growth in faith, Paul became as weak. Paul did not argue with weak Christians; on the contrary, he was careful to do nothing that would damage their faith or conscience, even if a proposed action was not in itself wrong.
Paul became as weak that he might gain the weak. His overriding concern was the spiritual welfare of others, and his concern governed all his behavior. He sought first to bring men to faith in Christ, then he sought to continually strengthen them and help them mature in that faith.
The point that Paul was making is very simple: in order to achieve his purpose of winning people to Christ and in order to be successful in the use of his gifts, he was prepared to relinquish his rights.
Paul did not teach situational ethics. He did not say that the end justifies the means. He did not say that anything is permissible as long as people are reached. He said very clearly in verse 21 "not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ." His liberty or his accommodation to others' customs was only permissible within the moral law of God. Paul was flexible in his methods but not in his morals. The only areas that Paul relinquished his rights (or changed his practices) were areas where there is Christian liberty, such eating meat or going to a movie. Paul said, "Although in matters of Christian liberty I may have a right to do a certain thing, to go to a certain place or to dress a certain way, I will not use that right if it will hurt any individual or hinder him from coming to Christ".
Paul summarized the whole principle at the end of verse 22: "I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some". He was prepared to accommodate to every class of people in every area of Christian liberty that he might save some, that he might be the instrumentality in the sovereign hand of God in bringing men to Jesus Christ.
The climax of this text comes in verse 23: "Now this I do for the gospel's sake, that I may be partaker of it with you". The Greek text reads "And everything I do..." Everything he did was for the sake of winning men to Jesus Christ. Paul's personal interests and desires were totally subjected to the purpose and responsibility that God had given to him as an apostle of Jesus Christ. His entire life was lived to promote the Gospel.
How many believers do you know who live like this? How many of us totally relinquish our rights for the sake of the promotion of the gospel? Not many! At best we could say, "I do some things for the sake of the gospel." But I believe that most believers would have to say, "I do all things for the sake of myself, for the sake of my own interest and desires."
After Paul's statement that he does all things for the gospel, he said that his commitment to this course of ministry did not come easily (9:24-27). It required personal discipline. Our liberty cannot be limited without self-control. Our sinfulness resents and resists restrictions. Paul gave an illustration of self-discipline from the Greek games:
Paul illustrated his earnest striving by referring to the Isthmian games held near Corinth every two years. The footrace was one of the major events and was taken very seriously by the contestants. They trained for at least ten months and pledged to violate none of the regulations of the contest. In the Isthmian games, only one athlete received the prize. If so many athletes struggled to excel although only one could win, how much more should we be willing to strive for a far more valuable reward. "Run in such a way that you may obtain it." Paul interjected this like a coach urging a runner on to victory.
What does it take to be a winner? "And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things" (1 Corinthians 9:25). Any winning athlete knows that discipline is essential to preparing for victory. If we could have asked a winner at the Olympian games in Corinth how he trained to win, he would have said, "Discipline!" For ten months before the games he would have denied himself every legitimate pleasure that would have interfered with his training. His diet was very strict, he exercised daily, he got the rest he needed, he submitted to the instruction of his coach. In order to win, the athlete had to deny all his legitimate, lawful rights that would hinder him.
What great prize did the winner of the Isthmian games strive for? "Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown": a wreath or garland of green leaves was placed on the head of the winner. It soon withered away. What prize awaits the disciplined believer? "But we an incorruptible [crown]". This is in contrast to the quickly withering garland of leaves. An incorruptible crown is a special reward given to faithful runners, much like the "crown of glory" will be given to faithful elders (1 Pet. 5:4) and the "crown of life" to faithful martyrs (Rev. 2:10).
With the incorruptible crown in mind, Paul said, "Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air". Paul ran the race of the Christian life with self-denial and hard work. He did not run uncertainly, without a clear sense of his goal. Whether in conforming to the life-style of anyone he was with, or in not demanding support from his converts, or in anything he did, Paul had a definite aim. He did not allow anything to hold him back from his goal. "So fight I" literally translates "So I box." He fought his opponent rather than shadow boxing.
The denial of personal rights brings us to the reward platform at the judgement seat of Christ, therefore Paul resolved to live his life in subjection to the will of God. He controlled his body so that all his actions would be to the glory of God.
Discipline is from the Greek word, hupopiazo, which means to "bruise the face under the eyes" or to buffet. In the Greek "to bring the body into subjection" literally means "making it my slave." We must control our bodies and make them serve us, not let them control us. Our bodies cry out for their rights. Most believers are slaves to their bodies. Their bodies tell their minds what to do. Their bodies decide when to eat, what to eat, how much to eat, when to sleep and get up, and so on. An athlete cannot allow that.
"Lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway (KJV), disqualified (NKJV)". A Christian is both a contestant and an official who calls athletes to the race. Paul was aware that even though he had preached to others, his own running of the race would be judged by God. The implication is that if such earnest, self-denying effort was necessary for Paul, how much more for the Corinthians, who were carelessly taking advantage of their Christian freedom.
Paul's point in this chapter is this: "I am an apostle of Jesus Christ and as such I have the right to be supported by the Church. But I relinquish that right in order to avoid anything that would hinder my calling of bringing men and women to Jesus Christ. I limit my liberty that I might gain an eternal reward."
Are you fulfilling your call? Are you using the gifts that have been given to you by God? Are you limiting your liberty in order to effectively minister for the Lord. Or are living your life as a slave of your body and its passions? Do you act for yourself or for the glory of God? You have rights, but if you exercise them to the hindrance of others you are not living the disciplined life for the glory of God.
God has called many of you to be husbands and fathers and in that calling you have great liberty. But if you use your liberty at the expense of your wife or children your home will deteriorate. You have a right to be successful in business, but if it hinders your family you are to lay aside that right.
Some of you are called to be mothers or wives and in that calling you have great liberty. You have the liberty to watch soap operas and spend your days doing things that you enjoy. But if your liberty hinders others you are not walking in love and you will be disqualified.
How many of us are concerned about being disqualified? Paul was. Yes, we all have liberties but we are to relinquish them for the sake of advancing the glory of God. The athlete has the right to do many things that he does not do in order to win the prize. Do you see yourself of a Christian athlete who is striving in the race of life in order to glorify God? Too many of us are spectators who need to get out of the stands and in the race. Are you a disciplined believer? Are you denying yourself for the advancement of the kingdom? Do you have a coach, a spiritual mentor who can help encourage and guide you in the spiritual race?
We all have rights and liberties in our lives, but if the use of our liberity is harming someone else we are not walking in love. May God help us to be willing to lay aside our rights for the sake of others. May we be willing to follow the example of our Lord and Saviour who laid aside His rights as diety and became a man to die for us.
|
|