1 Corinthians (Written)

Sunday, 7 September 2014

Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope. 1 Corinthians 9:10

This verse refers to the previous verse. Taken together, they read –

“Do I say these things as a mere man? Or does not the law say the same also? ⁹ For it is written in the law of Moses, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.’ Is it oxen God is concerned about? Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope.”

Paul’s question concerning the words of Deuteronomy 25:4 is whether God intended to mean an ox, or was He rather making a spiritual picture of a fortiori argument. Is it “altogether for our sakes?” The answer immediately follows – “For our sakes, no doubt.” The context of the verse, which is in the middle of other passages dealing with human matters, indicates that it was actually referring to a human matter as well. However, this does not exclude a literal meaning also. The word translated as “altogether” is pantos. Albert Barnes, after reviewing the nine uses of pantos in the New Testament concludes –

“The word here, therefore, means that the ‘principle’ stated in the law about the oxen was so broad and humane, that it might “certainly, surely, particularly” be regarded as applicable to the case under consideration.”

And this is exactly what one should deduce when reading the law in Deuteronomy. The logical thought process should be something like: “God has said to not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain. The law is intended for us to understand and consider God’s heart for us. If God is concerned about a mere ox as it labors, then how much more is He concerned about us! If I have employees under me who labor for me, I should give greater care to them than the law requires me to give to my brute beast.”

The man “who plows should plow in hope.” The laborer shouldn’t come home hungry after his day of work if he has been laboring in the processing of food all day. That would be an abuse of the bounty given to the one who hired the laborer. Likewise, “he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope.” There are various ways to thresh grain depending on the type of grain. Isaiah explains this to us –

“For the black cummin is not threshed with a threshing sledge, Nor is a cartwheel rolled over the cummin; But the black cummin is beaten out with a stick, And the cummin with a rod. Bread flour must be ground; Therefore he does not thresh it forever, Break it with his cartwheel, Or crush it with his horsemen. This also comes from the Lord of hosts, Who is wonderful in counsel and excellent in guidance.” Isaiah 28:27-29

If an ox is not to be muzzled while it treads out the grain, then it logically follows that someone who beats out grain with a stick should also not be kept from partaking as he threshes. Therefore, the principle found in the law is God’s way of protecting His creatures and keeping the hearts of His people from hardening towards His laborers. It is an ingeniously placed passage in Deuteronomy which points to much more than it at first appears.

From this springboard, Paul will move from grains to the gospel.

Life application: The word given to us by God spans thousands of years of human existence and yet it coalesces into one whole, united, and understandable work of literature. The reason this is so is because God is the ultimate Author of its words. He carefully, methodically, and slowly revealed His heart to us through His word in order to show us our great need for Jesus. As you read the pages of the Bible, never stop looking for spiritual applications and pictures of Christ. You will be abundantly rewarded as you do.

O Lord, my heart often gets beating rather quickly as I read Your word. A sudden insight into something I’d never before considered will fill me with a sense of awe at how I missed that in the past. Reading a psalm will often elevate my soul to a higher place where my hope in You becomes surer than only a moment earlier. When I contemplate the words You spoke to and through your prophets, I see history itself unfold. I stand ever in awe of the beauty revealed in Your superior word. Thank You for this immeasurable gift! Amen.

Saturday, 6 September 2014

For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Is it oxen God is concerned about? 1 Corinthians 9:9

In his words of 1 Corinthians 9:9, Paul uses a common rabbinical technique known as kal va-khomer (from light to heavy) to argue his case. It is an argument as Chabad describes “whereby a conclusion is drawn from a minor premise or more lenient condition (“light”) to a major or more strict one (“weighty”) or vice versa, a fortiori argument. In common parlance, ‘all the more so.'”

He has, for the past several verses, been arguing for the case that he bears all the rights of an apostle. In order to bolster that argument in a way which the “judaizers” could not honestly refute, he turns to the very source of their claims for their laws, traditions, and heritage – the Law of Moses. There, within the law are written the words, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” This is stated in Deuteronomy 25:4.

The idea is that to muzzle an ox, who is participating in the labors of treading out the grain in order to separate the grain from the chaff, would show a disrespect for the laborer, even if it were a mere ox. Muzzling involved tying its mouth closed in one way or another or even placing a basket over its mouth so that it couldn’t eat the grain, thus depriving it of the food that was in its eyesight. It showed a coldness of heart towards the brute beast that was unacceptable in the eyes of God.

Paul then asks, “Is it oxen God is concerned about?” The answer is two-fold. First, “Yes, God cares about the oxen or he wouldn’t have placed the admonition in the law in the first place.” For this to be prescribed showed that God did, in fact, care for the oxen. He showed the same care for the animals of Nineveh when speaking to Jonah. At the very end of the book, these final words are noted –

“You have had pity on the plant for which you have not labored, nor made it grow, which came up in a night and perished in a night. And should I not pity Nineveh, that great city, in which are more than one hundred and twenty thousand persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left—and much livestock?” Jonah 4:10, 11

However, in making his kal va-khomer, or “light to heavy” argument, Paul shows that though God did care for the ox, he displays more care for man, His highest creature. This is with all certainty (though Paul doesn’t explain it here) because bordering the curious verse about muzzling the ox are examples of care for His people. Deuteronomy 25:1-3 deals with the punishment of an offender of the law and the mercy he was to be given. No more than 40 lashes could be meted out lest, “he should exceed this and beat him with many blows above these, and your brother be humiliated in your sight.”

And then after the note about the ox comes more verses which concern the care of His people. Specifically, the rights of, and care for, the widow of a dead man. The principle of the ox then, even within the law itself, implies something of greater weight than the mere words initially seem to entail. God is showing care for the ox and yet, the implication is of greater care for His people.

The verse is of such importance to understanding the greater principle intended by the law that Paul repeats it in his first letter to Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:18.

Life application: The Law of Moses, though set aside in Christ, contains valuable insights into God’s relationship with, and desires for, His creatures. Because the Old Testament is so heavily cited in the New Testament, it is not truly possible to grasp the depth of New Testament revelation without understanding that of the Old. Don’t be afraid to dig into the Old Testament… it won’t bite you, but rather it will edify your understanding of God’s redemptive plans for humanity.

Precious Lord! I am thrilled beyond measure to wake up in the morning and know that You are there. As the day unfolds, I can see Your hand of grace, leading me to beauty that surrounds me – rainbows and puffy white clouds are there if I will just lift my eyes and look. The food I eat… I will not take it for granted, but will remember to thank You for it. So many others lack the abundance I possess. Lord, thank You for Your attentive hand of care for me. And should it all disappear tomorrow, I will thank You for my lack, knowing that it was ordained by You. You are great and are always worthy of praise. Amen.

Friday, 5 September 2014

Do I say these things as a mere man? Or does not the law say the same also? 1 Corinthians 9:8

After defending his apostleship, Paul has been asking rhetorical questions to bolster his rights as an apostle. He is entitled to partake of the benefits of being an apostle whether he exercises those rights or not. It can be inferred that because he didn’t exercise them, others were using it as evidence that he really wasn’t an apostle.

Because of his apostleship to the gentiles, there was certainly a dislike of his status among those who argued that the gospel was for the Jews, or at least for those who held to the law of Moses. That issue was resolved at the Council of Jerusalem, but it didn’t change the hearts and minds of those in the legalistic faction of Judaizers. In fact, it hasn’t changed them today, 2000 years later. Regardless of this, Paul’s apostleship was valid and he was entitled to the rights and benefits of it.

In order to bolster this, especially in the eyes of those who held to Scripture (meaning what is now called the Old Testament), he will appeal to Scripture itself. He uses this particular formula abundantly in his letters. Instead of relying merely on human reasoning, Scripture will support his claims. In this verse, he uses two separate words to intensify what he is relaying. In his comment “do I say,” the verb is lalo. In the comment “does not the law say” the verb is legei. The first word, lalo, is a general word; as a mere man. The second word, legei, is a more distinguished word; from Scripture itself.

Life application: Paul’s argument from human reason is bolstered and intensified when it is combined with the very words of Scripture. This is an extremely useful point to consider and remember. Defending the faith from science and philosophy is a wonderful way to get people to consider the workings of God. However, only Scripture can specifically bring a person to salvation. One who relies on Scripture first for their worldview will always have a better understanding of the issues which surround us, be they morality, Zionism, the nature of God, or a plethora of other things that swirl around us from day to day.

Lord, there are many ways to look at a given issue, be it morality, prosperity, health, Zionism, the nature of creation, or even the nature of You who created. Because these things can be argued in different ways, I will always first consider them from the perspective of Your word. I know that in doing this, I will have the superior source from which to make my decisions about those issues, regardless of how they may appear in the world around me. I trust Your word above all else to be my light, my guide, and my source of understanding those issues which are addressed by You. Thank You for Your superior word! Amen.

Thursday, 4 September 2014

Who ever goes to war at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruit? Or who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk of the flock? 1 Corinthians 9:7

Paul now continues with three more questions which are rhetorical in nature. Each demands a response of “Nobody!” He begins with warriors. “Who ever goes to war at his own expense?” Do those who fight the battles for king and country do so at their own expense? No. Instead, they are fed, clothed, and paid by whoever they are fighting for. Even those who are mercenaries fight for pay by the power who has hired them.

If a soldier who is enlisted to take life is so paid for his service, how much more then should a soldier who is sent out to preserve life be paid for the warfare he wages. And Paul equates the ministry of Christ to an on-going battle. In Ephesians 6, he notes that, “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand” (Ephesians 6:12, 13).

Likewise, in 1 Timothy 1:18, he notes this to his beloved protégé – “This charge I commit to you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare.” The lesson from this is that the soldier of Christ should, in fact, be paid for his services by the church for whom he wages war.

Next he asks, “Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruit?” Again, the question demands an answer that the vinedresser does partake of the fruit of the vine. It is right and expected that he should do so. In the very first such example of the planting of a vineyard in the Bible, this is noted –

“And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. Then he drank of the wine and was drunk…” Genesis 9:20

Noah not only planted a vineyard, he also enjoyed the benefit of what the vineyard produced. Regardless of whether one finds fault in him getting drunk, the fact is that he partook of his vineyard. Later, in the Law itself and certainly the verse to which Paul is speaking, Moses notes these points to the people of Israel prior to their entry into the land of Canaan –

“Then the officers shall speak to the people, saying: ‘What man is there who has built a new house and has not dedicated it? Let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man dedicate it. Also what man is there who has planted a vineyard and has not eaten of it? Let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man eat of it. And what man is there who is betrothed to a woman and has not married her? Let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the battle and another man marry her.'” Deuteronomy 205-7

Again as he did concerning the warrior, Paul equates those who labor for Christ as “farmers.” In 2 Timothy 2:6, he shows that the expectation is that the spiritual farmer should be allowed to participate in the benefits of the harvest in which he labors, when he says, “The hardworking farmer must be first to partake of the crops.” The lesson from this is that the one who works in Christ’s field should be paid for his services by the church for whom he farms.

In his third question, he asks about the flocks of the field – “Or who tends a flock and does not drink of the milk of the flock?” Again, the answer is that those who do so certainly partake of their efforts. Under the law, the tithe of the flocks and herds were taken to where the temple stood and they were eaten by the giver after they were sacrificed. This is found in Deuteronomy chapter 12 –

“There you shall take your burnt offerings, your sacrifices, your tithes, the heave offerings of your hand, your vowed offerings, your freewill offerings, and the firstborn of your herds and flocks. And there you shall eat before the Lord your God, and you shall rejoice in all to which you have put your hand, you and your households, in which the Lord your God has blessed you.” Deuteronomy 12:6, 7

As before, the work of those in the leadership positions in the church is equated to that of the shepherd. In Acts 20:28, Paul states this to the leaders in Ephesus –

“Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.”

Peter uses the shepherd terminology again in 1 Peter 5:2. Thus, the lesson from this is that the one who tends to Christ’s flock should be paid for his services by the church for whom he shepherds. From these three examples, Paul clearly defends the principle that it is not out of the ordinary for the one in leadership to expect to receive the benefit of his labors directly from the church.

Life application: In today’s world, it is common for pastors and other clergy to be paid for their services. This is right and appropriate. However, it was never intended for people in such positions to be paid extravagant amounts. Those who have jet planes, million-dollar mansions, and flashy clothing and jewelry make a mockery of the humble, hard-working lives of the apostles who established the church. If your pastor lives a life of flash and pomp, you should find another pastor in more Bible-centered church.

O God, the Father of those who have by faith called on Christ as Lord, thank You for the wondrous hope of the future which You have granted to us. In this life, there are great days, good times, and moments of true elation. But there are also crummy days, times when nothing goes right, and moments of previously unimagined sadness. One day can be completely the opposite of the next. And yet, when things go south and life is dim, we have the assurance that the very best days we’ve had are not even a taste of a regular day when we are brought into Your presence. With this assurance, we can get through the tough times. Someday, we will see Jesus! Amen!

Wednesday, 3 September 2014

Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working? 1 Corinthians 9:6

This verse is not actually a new thought which is submitted to the Corinthians, but the completion of the series of questions which began in verse 4. Though stated as questions, they are rhetorical in nature and are to be taken as affirmative statements… “I and Barnabas have a right to earn a living from our preaching.” By asking it rhetorically after having given the evidences of his apostleship though, he is merely showing the ridiculous nature of the situation.

There was seemingly, however, a group that felt that Paul and his ministry wasn’t actually worthy of being supported by the church. It probably goes to the decision rendered in Galatians 2:9, 10 which reads thus –

“James, Cephas, and John, those esteemed as pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship when they recognized the grace given to me. They agreed that we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised. All they asked was that we should continue to remember the poor, the very thing I had been eager to do all along.”

Maybe it was believed that because Paul was “only” sent to the Gentiles, he wasn’t worthy of support. However, as history has borne out, his ministry and letters have been far more productive in establishing the church than all the other letters combined. His words have comprised the main doctrine of the church for nearly 2000 years. Despite this, and despite the true apostolic ministry that he had, he continued to support himself and work for a living.

It is known from Acts 18:13 that he was a tentmaker by trade. In this, he worked to support himself. The Greek word for “working” is ergazesthai and it indicates manual labor. Despite his tireless efforts in sharing the gospel, he was a man of physical labors as well.

One final note on this verse is that this is the last time Barnabas is mentioned in Scripture. The previous mentioning of him was in Acts 15. In that account, Paul and Barnabas had a great dispute about a matter which caused them to almost come to blows. They divided at that time, and there is no record of them having met up again. However, it appears from this verse that Barnabas took Paul’s example of working for a living to heart and continued to follow this pattern in his own ministry.

Life application: There is nothing wrong with good hard work. In fact, the pastor who gets out and tends to the church grounds, works around his house, or works physically in some other way will be a positive example to those in the church to not sit around collecting welfare or other charity when they are fully capable of earning their own way. The Bible says in 2 Thessalonians 3:10, “If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.” In this verse, the same word for work, ergazesthai, is used which was used by Paul 1 Corinthians 9:6. Don’t be a sluggard. Rather, if your physical makeup and the economy around you allows it, be productive with your hands, not causing others to support you when you are fully capable of earning a living.

Lord God, thank You for the work of my hands which You have given me to do. There are things to fix and clean around the house. There are lawns to be mowed, trees to be trimmed, and cars to be washed and waxed. And at my regular job, there is always something I can do to be productive. None of these things are demeaning or lowly, but rather they are worthy of my best effort and my sincere, heartfelt attendance to them. And so Lord, establish the work of my hands and be glorified in how I follow through with each task. Amen.