April 1, 2016 1 Corinthians 8:12 – 9:8
Download discussion questions: 1 Corinthians 8_12-9_18 rights
The tone of Paul’s letter seems to change dramatically at the beginning of chapter 9. His expression of sacrificial humility and concern (“If food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again” in 1 Corinthians 8:13) becomes what various members of our discussion group described as a tangent or a “bunny trail” or even a defensive rant.
Perhaps the unspecified issues raised by the Corinthian’s questions (1 Corinthians 7:1) included concerns or criticism or complaints about Paul’s lifestyle. Whatever the question (if that is what prompted his response) Paul defends his rights: regarding food and drink (v. 4), regarding marriage (v. 5), regarding work (v. 6). One of our group members commented that there was a common practice for itinerant philosophers and teachers to travel to different cities making money by giving speeches. Perhaps Paul was being compared to this group and accused of mercenary motives. (We barely avoided a lengthy comparison with present-day political figures!)
His defense centered on his role as an apostle, one who had actually seen “Jesus our Lord” (9:1). In addition to his authority as an apostle, Paul extends the defense of his rights in three directions: common sense, Biblical principle, and practical precedent. The common sense argument cites examples of soldiers and farmers and shepherds who benefit from their work (v. 7). Then Paul says that his defense is not limited to common sense of “human judgment” but is also confirmed in the Law of Moses (v. 8). He quotes from Deuteronomy 25:4 about not muzzling an ox, presumably to allow the working animal to graze. (He quotes the verse again in 1 Timothy 5:18 to encourage the support of elders.) Finally, there is a precedent of payment for spiritual assistance that “others” (v. 12) have received. Paul makes a strong case for his rights, particularly it seems his right to be compensated for his ministry.
Then, after building such a strong argument for his rights, he once again changes direction and asserts that he is not using the right he has just established: “Nevertheless we did not use this right” (v. 12b). Just as in the case of the freedom to eat even pagan food (8:12-9:1), here again Paul seems to be making a clear, intentional choice to forego legitimate rights. In this example, his concern seems to be even broader than the “stumbling” of an individual brother (8:13). Now Paul is concerned with the wider reputation of the gospel and his preaching. Both priests in the Jewish temple and those in pagan worship make their living from what they do (v. 13) and so also those who proclaim the gospel (v. 14). But Paul wants to be certain that no accusation can be made against him based on mercenary motives or monetary rewards. Instead, he points to the reward that actually motivates him. One member of the group suggested this is a reference to heavenly rewards. But the text itself seems clear that Paul has something much more immediate in mind: “What then is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may offer the gospel without charge” (v. 18; Note that he uses the word gospel eight times in his explanation in v. 12-18). Paul is motivated by the gospel itself and the privilege he had in preaching its life-giving message. The reward of freely offering God’s salvation to others far outweighed the rights he gladly gave up. Perhaps the passion that fueled Paul’s “rant” was driven by the depth of joy he had in preaching the gospel. He didn’t want any other reward to diminish that joy.
Our discussion turned to our own rights. What we might need to sacrifice for the benefit of the gospel? The gospel was more important to Paul than even his basic right to financial support. What about us? Our day-to-day experience of our rights may not be as dramatic as Paul’s, but their subtlety is part of the problem. We often assume rights (usually unspoken), and we react badly when those rights are violated: the right not to be hurt, the right to a good reputation, the right to good treatment. Those rights are easily disregarded by a comment from a spouse, or the attitude of an unpleasant store clerk, or a rude driver, or a hundred other minor irritations. Our natural response is usually annoyance, or anger, or a retaliatory word. That response becomes our reward, the satisfaction of getting even, or putting another person in their place, or preserving our dignity. We have defended our rights. But if the gospel is more important to us than our rights, our desire will be, like Paul, to “cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ” (v. 12b). Christ Himself, whose rights were most egregiously violated, is our best example: “and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously” (1 Peter 2:23). He was not compelled to retaliate because of His dependence on His Father. May we recognize the “rights” we are assuming and consciously, intentionally choose to “endure all things” (1 Corinthians 9:12) for the reward of displaying the character of Christ and the content of the gospel in our behavior.