1 Corinthians 9:15-18

Butler's Comments

SECTION 2

Relinquishment of Rights (1 Corinthians 9:15-18)

15 But I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing this to secure any such provision. For I would rather die than have any one deprive me of my ground for boasting. 16For if I preach the gospel, that gives me no ground for boasting. For necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel! 17For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward; but if not of my own will, I am entrusted with a commission. 18What then is my reward? Just this: that in my preaching I may make the gospel free of charge, not making full use of my right in the gospel.

1 Corinthians 9:15-16 Sacrifice: In this section the apostle begins to make a transition from the specific right of financial support he claimed, to the principle of the need for relinquishment of any right in certain circumstances. He has called upon the Corinthians to consider the principle (1 Corinthians 8:1-13) earlier. He illustrates the application of the principle in his own actions (1 Corinthians 9:1-14). He will state the purpose of the principle (1 Corinthians 9:19-27) later, but here he is proving that he has not asked the Corinthians to make a more severe sacrifice of rights than he himself had been willing to make. He uses the Greek word kechremai, a perfect tense verb, which indicates an action begun in the past and continuing at the present. Paul had never exercised his right to be financially supported upon the Corinthian church.

Furthermore, he denies that he has used the illustration of his own practice as some sort of subtle attempt to elicit financial support from them now. He says, ... nor am I writing these things in order that so it should become with me (literal translation of the Greek). His motive in using himself as an example is pure. He says, in fact, he would rather die than have any one deprive him of the opportunity to exemplify in his own life the principle of sacrificing rights for the edification of others. And Paul never used the phrase, I would rather die. in a flippant way. He was deadly serious about this principle! He did not mean to say he boasted about his own sacrifices in an arrogant, self-righteous way. Paul uses the word boasting (Gr. kauchema, glorying) in the good sense, meaning, to hold up or exalt as an example of Christian virtue (see 2 Corinthians 7:14-15). This translation clarifies the true meaning of the next three verses.

In light of the above remarks we should paraphrase 1 Corinthians 9:16, When I preach the gospel I have nothing to hold up or exalt as an example of Christian sacrificenecessity lies upon me, I feel compelled to do so, I am utterly miserable and unsatisfied if I do not preach the gospel. Paul discusses his compulsion for preaching in 2 Corinthians 5:11-21.

The high-water mark of Christian discipleship is when a person freely chooses to give up his rights in order to remove any obstacle to the gospel of Christ being heard or seen. Giving up rights did not hinder Paul in his race toward the highest good God could make of his life. In fact, this discipline sharpened his self-control (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:24-27) and became beneficial in the development of godliness in him. His choice to give up the right to financial support from the Corinthians gave him opportunity to perfect his character in the area of servanthood and helpfulness. This actually helped Paul form within himself the very nature of Christ. Jesus is the perfect example of self-control and servanthood rather than rights. Having every right to expect the disciples to wash his feet (John 13:1-38), he washed theirs instead. One cannot be a disciple of Jesus unless he is willing to forfeit rights rather than let them become obstacles to the gospel. There is only one way to serve God and that is to serve mankind. If we are going to serve sinful and imperfect men, inevitably, somewhere, we will have to choose to forfeit some of our rights. Jesus did! (Philippians 2:5-11).

1 Corinthians 9:17-18 Satisfaction: What does Paul mean, For if I do this of my own will. ? Did he not preach by choice? Certainly! Remember, he is speaking about the relinquishment of certain rights which were his because he was a full-time preacher of the gospel. Paul is trying to convince these Corinthians that there are greater rewards to be found in the relinquishment of rights.

We might paraphrase 1 Corinthians 9:17-18 thus, If preaching is simply my way of choosing to make a living, I should be, and will be, rewarded with my living; if I could make a living another way, and I could, but I have chosen to preach anyway, then it is apparent that I consider preaching more than a way to make a livingI consider it a divine stewardship with which I have been entrusted. What reward, then, or satisfaction do I receive, if I receive no financial support? Just this: my pay is to do without pay! My joy is in making the gospel free of charge in order that no one might use the idea of my right to financial support as an obstacle to the truth of God. Paul would not allow the slightest hint of profiteering or exploitation to be found in his ministry (cf. 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 4:2).

Great satisfaction comes from giving up rights when others may be served for the sake of Christ. Paul refused to lose the satisfaction he received in such service by insisting on a few rights or liberties. He would rather die than be robbed of the great enjoyment he received in sacrificing for others. It is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:38). Satisfaction and contentment is part of a godly character. God has given us the freedom to choose to renounce certain freedoms or rights he has given us in order to have this contentment. This satisfaction which Paul enjoyed is somewhat like the satisfaction a mother or father gets when giving up one of their rights to help a precious child. It is the satisfaction a teacher gets when he surrenders one of his rights to help a student reach his highest potential. It is the satisfaction a craftsman gets when he gives up his right to sleep and to food in order to produce the finest work of which his hands are capable. Paul was no masochist. He did not give up financial support because he loved to suffer. He sought no self-righteous merit (cf. Philippians 3:1-16). His aim was to glorify Christ and present no obstacle whatsoever to the salvation of any man. If Paul had been persuaded that refusing the financial support might become an obstacle, he would not have refused it. Could refusal ever become a problem? Apparently the Corinthians made it a hindrance to accepting Paul's apostleship (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:7-11; 2 Corinthians 12:11-18; 2 Thessalonians 1:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8). And even in modern times, some self-supporting preachers and missionaries have found it an obstacle to their ministries.

The comments of Fred Fisher, Commentary on 1 & 2 Corinthians, pg. 146, pub. Word, are pertinent here:

Paul would have rebelled against the modern practice of paying preachers a salary as if they were mercenaries selling their services. He would have insisted, I think, that churches should support their ministers. There may not seem to be much difference between giving a minister so much support and paying him the same amount in salary. The money is the same. But the principle is not. Salary implies payment for services received. Support implies that the church enables the minister to be free from worldly concerns so that he may carry on his ministry. His reward should not be earthly, but heavenly. The problem is that the misuse of the word salary may lead both the church and the minister to take a worldly view of the ministry.

Though the modern preacher has a right to expect the church to support his ministry with financial remuneration, he should be willing to relinquish that right should it become an obstacle to the proclamation of the gospel. Furthermore, no Christian preacher should consider financial support his source of satisfaction in the ministry, His satisfaction (boasting) should be found in servanthood.