Lessons From 1 Corinthians – Lesson 8
There is a big difference between have to and should and I can but should I.
So we can now look at what is between the introduction and conclusion of this topic and keep it in the context of I can but should I. I have liberty and I have rights, but what about others?
I can but I should be considering is it helpful to the cause of Christ and to others?
After introducing the topic with idols and meat, Paul is now going to us himself as an example.
Paul starts out with, I have the right to. I can. It has been established in scripture. It would even be fitting if I did in many ways.
And then will come the however…
1 Cor 9:1 Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?
1 Cor 9:2 If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.
He starts with how he is an apostle, he holds a special position appointed by God.
Also, they are Paul’s work in the Lord, Paul started that church. Paul led many of them to Christ and he taught many of them for a year and a half.
So Paul has authority in position as an apostle, and Paul has standing as their founding and because of all of the labor he invested into them.
Now that that is established he starts working into the issue he is using as an example of I can but should I. And it has to do with getting paid.
1 Cor 9:3 Mine answer to them that do examine me is this,
1 Cor 9:4 Have we not power to eat and to drink?
1 Cor 9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
1 Cor 9:6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
That is a rhetorical question. Paul and preachers like him. Like Barnabas. Barnabas was not an apostle, but Barnabas was a preacher who labored in the work of the Lord.
Have not we power to forbear working? The answer to the question is yes. Of course. The next verses make it clear that Paul is talking about not working a job to pay the bills.
They have the power, the position, the authority, to stop making tents and take their paycheck from churches. They can forbear working and take a paycheck from a church.
1 Cor 9:7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
If you plant a vineyard, you will eat the fruit of it. If you tend and care and feed a flock of sheep, you have earned the right to eat of the milk of the flock.
That is just common sense from life. Now Paul brings scripture into it that shows the same thing.
1 Cor 9:8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
1 Cor 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
1 Cor 9:10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
Paul says that there is no doubt that God put into this Holy word thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn, not for the ox’s sake.
It was written for our sakes. This shows an example and teaches the basic principal that where labor is done, the one doing the labor has every right to get paid. He should be paid.
1 Cor 9:11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
It was labor, it was work. To sow unto you spiritual things. It took time and work and effort and prayer. Since we sowed is it a great thing if we get paid?
I have heard that preached a lot. But they always stop there. They don’t consider the context that this is in a section of scripture that is dealing with I can but should I.
And more than that they stop at verse 11 and don’t touch verse 12.
1 Cor 9:12 If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.
So far Paul established his authority, and how he has earned it and how life in general and scripture both show that he has a right to be paid. Paul had that power. He could have demanded it and been within his rights.
However, Paul says we have not used this power and there were personal consequences to that. Paul says but suffer all things. Paul did without things.
Paul had the right to get paid and he gives the reason why he chose not to exercise that right.. Lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.
This topic of paying a preacher is given in the context of I can but should I.
And Paul has laid out that he could take a paycheck but Paul’s answer to I can but should I question is no. And why no. The same basic reason, the sake of others and the sake of the cause of Christ.
And just in case someone reading this is not satisfied with the ox treading out the corn should be allowed to eat some of the fruit of his work.
Paul brings in more scripture to prove beyond any doubt that he had a right to get paid and more than that, how God had established how His men got provided for thru His work.
1 Cor 9:13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?
1 Cor 9:14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.
You have to go back to the O.T. sacrifices to understand that. A man would bring a peace offering for his family and it would get cooked and part of it the priests took home for his family to eat and part of it the man would take home for his family.
That is how his family had enough to eat. It is how they made their living. And it was more than just the peace offering. They got other things thru the work. And remember those priests had to do that full time. They were not allowed to have an outside job.
And Paul says the same principal of getting paid applies to N.T. times.
However, keep in mind Paul was not required to not work a regular job. Paul made tents when needed. Paul had the power to keep working or forbear working.
Paul has already given one reason that He did not take a paycheck. It was for the sake of others and the cause of Christ. Now Paul is going to give another reason he did not take a paycheck.
1 Cor 9:15 But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.
Paul says I have used none of these things. That is speaking about all of the scriptures and examples of taking a paycheck. And he says he is not writing this to get paid. Listen to this strong language. It were better for me to die.
1 Cor 9:16 For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!
This is still in the context of taking a paycheck. And because he takes no pay, then Paul has nothing to glory of. His motivation is from the heart to preach the gospel. His motivation is not for the paycheck.
Taking no pay for it, is one way of clearly showing that you are doing it completely willingly.
1 Cor 9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
1 Cor 9:18 What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.
I can but should I. Paul says no. Paul’s personal answer to that was I should not.
He did not want to abuse his power in the gospel. He wanted his preaching to be completely done willingly and not done in any way for money. Paul wanted the gospel to go out without charge.
We have heard the part preached a lot about how a preacher has a right to get paid. And they take their primary proof text from these verses. However, they take them out of the context of I can but should I.
And they take and use them not as Paul used them. And they take them without Paul’s answer of no to the question I can but should I.
We all here know of a good example. Mitchell demanded his right to not only a paycheck but a large paycheck. His Wednesday message he spent zero time on. He purchased those completely done and with the little books from Landcaster. So he only had to prepare for Sunday.
He only had a few people. So not much counseling to do or hospital visits. No shut ins to take care of and regularly visit. And on top of that he only wanted to go put tracts out once a month for about an hour.
No other ministries, no other work for the Lord at all. No prison work, hospital work, or anything else. He claimed his power and his right and took a full paycheck.
I mean a large check equivalent or even larger than pastors at well-established large churches get. Biblically he had a right to take pay. The Bible is clear he did have a right. But what about the should. What about considering Paul’s example. In some cases the answer should be no to the question I can but should I.
Think about what could have been and what happened.
He could have went and got a job, and forebear on taking a paycheck. They then could have easily rented a store front and had a permeant place to meet.
There would have been more money that could have went to the work of the lord. Like we do here in helping others get the gospel out and getting it out ourselves and on top of that caring for the poor and fatherless. God is pleased with those things and I believe sends blessings for it.
Instead Mitchell bleed it dry. Ran it until too many supporting churches stopped pouring money into it.
Being in it for the career, for the money, leads to grieving the spirit. Demanding your right in some situations is not wise.
A preacher who grieves the spirit will mess things up sooner or later. He ran off Mark his sound guy and his wife because Mark was not white. Yep Racism.
Then he ran off his song leader and some others. Finally he had to shut it down. That Baptist church is no more.
I can but should I. To Paul it was clear that he could take a paycheck, but Paul decided he should not. The work was more important. To Paul the heart and motivation for preaching was more important.
The cause of Christ was more important. Can you maybe see another reason here that preachers find it difficult to preach Corinthians?
To Paul it is better to forego the I can and instead be a voluntary servant to all. That is what Paul brings up next.
1 Cor 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.
1 Cor 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;
1 Cor 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.
1 Cor 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
Paul is not talking about compromising truth in those verses. He is not talking about doing the law one day and then not the next. He is talking about serving all, and being able to talk to all.
If you are going to witness to a Jew back then, you are going to have to know about and talk about the law.
And Paul serves all and tries to reach all for the gospel’s sake.
1 Cor 9:23 And this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.
This is a good place to stop. It will take too long to get to the end of this topic of I can but should I. So we will finish going thru where Paul ends in Chapter 10 next week.
From reading this section of scripture over and over, and thinking about it and praying about it. And then looking back at all that I have seen thru the years.
I have come to this opinion. Yes preachers can take a paycheck. Yes, the Bible says they have a right to a Paycheck. They can but should they. That is a personal questions that each pastor has to answer for himself and the circumstances of that church do enter in to the answer.
You can’t put all preachers in one neat and tidy bucket. Some men have large numbers of people and huge responsibilities. So much so that there is zero time for them to work a job.
If they worked a job the Lord’s work would be neglected. But I believe it takes a really good sized church to get to that point. So in those cases I think the answer to the question should I would be yes.
And I believe God would be pleased with that.
But I believe that most of your run of the mill, average small Baptist church, the answer to should I would be no.
I believe they would be better off and do more for the Lord’s work if they had someone who would not take a paycheck. The church would then have the funds to get the gospel out themselves and help others get the gospel out around the world and help the poor and fatherless.
They would not fall into the trap of needing money so bad that they come up with cleaver ways to fleece the flock. I don’t think it is a good situation when a tiny church’s budget is strained to the point that they cannot do the work of God.
You have every right to disagree with me. This is a I can but should I issue. And sometimes because of the circumstances the answer is yes I should and sometimes the answer is no I should not.
Sometimes preachers should like Paul, and put the needs of others and the cause of Christ above their needs and guard against the wrong motivation for preaching. And put God’s Work and the ability of the tiny church to provide for God’s Work above themselves.
And in large churches getting more done for Christ would necessarily mean taking a paycheck because he is spending 50 to 60 hours a week in the work of the Lord and must provide for his family.