# 34: 7-3-15 E

First Corinthians 9:1-2

Paul has been addressing an inquiry of the Corinthian assembly regarding eating foods which have been
offered to idols. Some felt that their knowledge that an idol is nothing meant theyre free to eat such foods
at the temple feasts, as they had done all of their lives.
These temple feasts marked all the key events in pagan society, and the libertines in the assembly were
arguing with Paul in their letter for the right to attend them - not to mention they had already started doing
it again!
But Paul showed these Corinthians that their actions were injurious to other believers in the assembly,
particularly new converts, who were not well established in the faith. As these weak brothers followed the
example of the libertines, their consciences were assaulted with guilt, causing them to stumble in their walk
with the Lord - a terrible setback for them, in their life of faith.
Pauls point is that knowledge, when misapplied for ones own selfish purposes, can wind up being
destructive to others. Freedom should always operate within the boundaries of love for others - or it will
cause sin to abound, instead.
And Paul made it clear that the sin was not just on the part of the weak brother - but on the part of the ones
who caused him to stumble - a sin against Christ, personally - for a member of Christs Body had been
injured, by their lack of love.
We had noticed last week that in the last verse of chapter 8, Paul switched his pronouns to the first person
singular, I - to indicate to the believers in Corinth that this was how Paul himself personally viewed this
freedom, in Christ. Id like to read that verse again.
[First Corinthians 8:13] Paul was showing the Corinthians that he himself would go to any length possible
to prevent a fellow believer from stumbling in his walk with the Lord. Its no less than Love would do, in
order to edify the members of Christs Body; to build them up, in the faith.
Paul is transitioning through this verse to his next issue, with the Corinthian assembly; which is their issue
with him. In chapter 9, Paul is defending both his apostolic authority as well as his conduct with the
Corinthians, when he was in their midst.
Paul would only be defending himself if these things had been called into question. And since Pauls
defense comes right in the middle of his argument concerning their eating foods offered to idols, we can be
sure that the Corinthians were challenging Pauls authority and conduct in an effort to rationalize their own
conduct - so that they could do what they pleased.
But Paul is about to turn their argument right on its puffed-up head. Not only will Paul quickly disprove
their challenge to him as an apostle, but he will show how, in his ministry with them, he limited himself in
terms of his rights as an apostle - all for Loves sake.
Well only be looking at the first two verses today, but I want to read through verse 12, so we can keep in
mind where Paul is taking his argument.
[Read First Corinthians 9:1-12]

# 34: 7-3-15 E

Did you notice that practically this whole section is a series of rhetorical questions? And the answers to
these questions are obvious, and essentially irrefutable. Paul is using this technique to compel the
Corinthians, as they answer the questions in their minds, to make Pauls argument, for themselves.
Why would he do this? In order to drive his argument home, with them. We have seen from the beginning
of this letter that there are instigators in Corinth who are challenging Pauls authority. They are trying to
commandeer the assembly and create a following for themselves, and their new philosophical take on the
gospel. Many believers in the assembly are being misled by them about Paul and his gospel.
It is essential for Paul to defend his apostolic authority with this assembly - not for his own sake, but for the
sake of the gospel. And as he makes his defense through these questions, Paul will also reveal how his
conduct as an apostle measures up perfectly to the gospel of grace.
Lets begin with the transition into chapter 9. Now, of course in Pauls letter, there are no chapter breaks;
so Pauls statement in chapter 8, verse 13 flows very naturally into the first verse of chapter 9.
Different translations place the first two questions of verse 1 in a different order. In the KV and the NKJV,
for example, Paul first asks, Am I not an apostle? But the NASB and the NIV begin with, Am I not
free? This is based on variations across many different manuscripts.
The net result is the same, but I tend to think it likely that Paul would have first written, Am I not free?,
based on his whole argument in chapter 8.
Paul would limit himself to whatever extent he could, to keep a brother from stumbling. And yet he then
points out to the Corinthians, Am I not free? - implying if anyone is free, I am - if you think youre free,
I certainly am, more so - and yet I am willing to limit myself. Its a challenge to them - from one who has
greater freedom, and yet restricts his freedom, all the more - out of love for others.
But look at what Paul bases his freedom upon - the fact that he is an apostle. We would not tend to think of
being an apostle as being particularly free - but as we look further into the passage, we can see that Paul
is referring to being free in terms of having rights (v. 4-6, 12).
As Christ Ones, some of the libertines in Corinth think they have certain rights. Paul is saying, as an
apostle, he knows he has certain rights - which he will prove at great length, in this chapter.
But before he does this, Paul first elaborates on the question as to whether he is an apostle. And the reason
for his doing this is found in the second verse. Ill read these two verses together.
v. 1-2 In verse 2, we see that Paul is distinguishing some others from the rest of the church in Corinth others to whom Paul is not an apostle. These are clearly the same ones who are examining Paul, in verse 3;
theyre sitting in judgment on him.
We encountered them back in chapter 4, where Paul wrote of those who were criticizing his ministry (4:15). They didnt like his way of speaking - he had no rhetorical skills (2:1-4). They didnt like the content
of his preaching, either - no Greek wisdom, just fundamental truths, over and over again (3:2).
This was not how an apostle should teach, but an elementary school teacher! Thats how the instigators in
the assembly in Corinth would have painted Paul - to diminish his authority, in order to promote their own.

# 34: 7-3-15 E

Pauls questions suggest that the instigators went even further - casting doubt on whether Paul was truly
appointed as an apostle by Jesus Christ, in the first place. Really? We think, how could these instigators
ever get anyone in the assembly to believe that? Because they made their argument based on the very
different way that Paul was appointed, as an apostle.
Do you remember what the term apostle literally means? One sent; an apostle is a sent one. It refers to a
commissioned messenger.
This term is used in the NT in two ways. In the narrower and more special sense, it is the term that Jesus
used for the twelve disciples whom He chose to be witnesses to Him, before the world. But apostle is
also used in a broader sense in the NT to mean those who ministered as missionaries, bearing witness to
Christ through the preaching of the gospel.
The apostles who were chosen by Jesus during His lifetime were eyewitnesses to His ministry. Later, Peter
brought out that this was an essential factor for an apostle - in the narrow sense of the term.
Turn to Acts chapter 1. After Jesus ascended back to heaven, about 120 of His disciples returned to
Jerusalem, to wait for the promised baptism in the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:4-5).
During this time, Peter spoke of the need to replace Judas Iscariot, who had betrayed Jesus and then killed
himself - revealing himself to be no true apostle or disciple of Jesus. And Peter indicated the qualifications
which this replacement must possess, in order to be numbered with the eleven remaining apostles.
[Acts 1:21-26] So the qualified believer had to be a witness to the life of Jesus throughout His entire
ministry - and to His death - and His resurrection - and His ascension.
Two were proposed by all the disciples - we take it that these two were qualified - but then they all turned
to the Lord to choose which one of the two it was to be - which was revealed by the casting of lots.
Matthias was indicated, showing that the Lord had chosen him as His twelfth eyewitness. What does the
number twelve mean, in Scripture? Government - which speaks of authority. The twelve apostles would
be dispatched directly under the authority of Christ to share the gospel throughout the world.
Turn to Matthew chapter 28. Matthew ends his account with what we know of as the Great Commission;
the dispatching of the apostles of Jesus, under His authority.
[Matthew 28:18-20]
The Father had given the Son all authority in heaven and on earth - to give Life, and to execute judgment
(Jn 5:26-27). Now Jesus was sending out His apostles under that same authority, given to Him. These
sent ones would bear witness to Jesus, preaching the words of Life wherever they go - so that men might
believe, and be saved. And the water baptism of those saved would be their first witness, to their Lord.
But Jesus was also commissioning His apostles to teach the truth, which He had taught them during His
ministry. As Jesus had opened up their understanding of the Scriptures (Lk 24:45), so they would now do
that, for the new disciples of Jesus.
In this way, the church would be built up on the foundational teaching of the apostles - which was the
teaching of Jesus. The church is built up on the Cornerstone, Jesus Christ (Eph 2:20).

# 34: 7-3-15 E

So an apostle, in the narrow sense, was chosen by Jesus; was an eyewitness to Him; was personally taught
by Him; and was authorized by Jesus to preach the gospel and teach believers the truth, for the edification
of the Body of Christ. There is one other quality of such apostles, although it is not specifically stated as
such.
Turn to Acts chapter 2. Peter has just preached the gospel for the first time in Jerusalem following
Pentecost.
[Acts 2:41-43]
v. 41 So there was the preaching of the gospel.
v. 42 Theres the teaching. The apostles doctrine is the doctrine of Jesus.
v. 43 We see evidence through the book of Acts of such wonders and signs - miracles, which the Lord did
through the hands of His apostles. These miracles authenticated their ministry, showing them to be the
Lords commissioned messengers, who bore His good news.
[Return to First Corinthians 9]
So when Paul was asking the Corinthians if he was an apostle, how did he mean it? Clearly, we could say
Paul was an apostle in the broad sense; he was a missionary, who preached the gospel.
But actually, we can be certain that Paul meant this in the more narrow sense, of one who had been
specifically chosen by the Lord Jesus, and therefore who had been directly invested with the Lords
authority.
How do we know Paul meant it that way? By his third question: Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?
The twelve who were chosen by Jesus were all eyewitnesses of Jesus; it was an essential characteristic of
an apostle appointed by the Lord. Paul was laying claim to those who were dispatched directly under the
authority of Jesus Himself.
And this is where Pauls detractors in Corinth tried to generate doubt, about Paul. Paul had not
accompanied the disciples all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among them (Acts 1:21).
Although its likely Paul would have glimpsed Jesus in Jerusalem, Paul considered Jesus to be an imposter,
at the time - hardly an appropriate witness!
In fact, Pauls first known personal encounter with Jesus wasnt during Jesus earthly life - it had followed
His death, His resurrection, His ascension - during which time, Paul had still considered Jesus to be an
imposter. It was after all those crucial events - of which an apostle was supposed to be an eyewitness - that
Paul finally had his encounter with Jesus.
But what an encounter it was - told most poignantly by Paul himself. Turn to Acts chapter 26. Following
three missionary journeys, arrest in Jerusalem and two years of imprisonment in Caesarea for the sake of
the gospel, Paul was subjected to a third trial - to satisfy the curiosity of King Herod Agrippa, who was
really a puppet king.
Paul first described his former manner of life, as a Pharisee, and how he persecuted the followers of Jesus.
Then he spoke of his encounter on the road to Damascus.

# 34: 7-3-15 E

[Acts 26:12-20]
v. 12 Paul was commissioned by the chief priests to arrest the disciples of Jesus who had fled to Damascus,
and extradite them to Jerusalem.
v. 13-15 They all saw a light from heaven - but only Paul saw Jesus; as Ananias said later to Paul, the Lord
Jesus appeared to you on the road as you came (Acts 9:17). They all heard a sound, but only Paul heard
the voice of Jesus; and Paul conversed with Jesus. This was no mere vision, in the mind of Paul; Paul saw
Jesus; Jesus appeared to Paul, as the risen, glorified Lord.
v. 16-18 Paul had been commissioned by the high priests, on a mission of death. Now he was
recommissioned by the Lord, and his new mission would bring forth life. So this was the Lords
appointment of Paul, as an apostle; specifically, His apostle to the Gentiles - such as those in Corinth.
In verse 16, Jesus told Paul that He was making him a minister and a witness both of the things which he
had seen - and of the things which He would yet reveal to Paul. In his letter to the Galatian assemblies,
Paul relates just how this was done.
Turn to Galatians chapter 1. These assemblies had been infiltrated by false teachers, who were also
disparaging Pauls apostleship. So Paul recorded his pertinent testimony as an apostle, for the Galatian
believers.
[Galatian 1:11-19]
v. 11-12 Paul was making it known to the Galatians that he received the gospel he preached to them by
divine revelation; Jesus revealed it to him, personally. A divine message validates the messenger, as being
sent from God.
Paul next shows that the gospel was not something he had sought out, in himself.
v. 13-14 Pauls point is that far from pursuing the gospel of grace, in himself, Paul was pursuing the
religion of Judaism, which is at enmity with God. Paul is showing this as a contrast to what came next: the
divine call of God on his life.
v. 15-19 Paul shows the receiving of the gospel by him to be an act of the divine will. First, God called
Paul - through that personal encounter with Jesus, on the road to Damascus - a divine calling. And Paul
responded to that call, in faith.
But then how did Paul come to know the gospel story - the fundamental truths of the work of redemption?
Paul needed to know this in order to fulfill his commission - to preach Jesus among the Gentiles. Did he
get the story from the believers in Damascus? No. From the apostles in Jerusalem? No again; Paul says he
did not confer with flesh and blood at all.
Paul indicates here that God Himself revealed His Son Jesus in Paul; not to him, but in him.
Now how did God do that? Well, Paul had received the Holy Spirit, when he believed. And the Holy Spirit
took all of those Scriptures in which Pauls mind was so steeped, and He revealed to Paul how the Son,
Jesus, was the fulfillment of all those Scriptures - all of those types; all of those prophecies.

# 34: 7-3-15 E

The Holy Spirit opened up the eyes of Pauls understanding - making him a most unique eyewitness to the
Son. And we can see that this must have taken place during that three year period that Paul was in Nabatean
Arabia - just east of Damascus. This was a divine revelation - things that now, Jesus had revealed to Paul.
After that time, Paul returned to Damascus, then went up to Jerusalem. Now he conferred with flesh and
blood - with Peter and James, the Lords brother.
Undoubtedly, Paul had a specific purpose in doing this; for here were the eyewitnesses to the life, and
death, and resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus. For fifteen days, Paul took in their accounts, as
well as the personal teachings of Jesus. But Paul makes it clear that the gospel itself had been a divine
revelation he received from God.
All of this stands in contrast to the manner in which the Twelve were chosen by Jesus, who had witnessed
His ministry, His crucifixion, His resurrection, and His ascension firsthand; all of it had unfolded before
their very eyes.
And Paul himself recognized that difference. Turn to First Corinthians chapter 15 - which well be
studying, one of these days. And because we will be doing that, well just be taking a brief look, right now.
[First Corinthians 15:1-10]
v. 1-4 This is what Paul received, as God revealed His Son in Paul.
v. 5-7 Paul is not meaning those he lists as exclusive - for instance, Cephas, Peter, is one of the Twelve.
These were separate sightings of Jesus, following His resurrection. Pauls point is that He was seen again
and again, by many witnesses.
Notice what Paul says next.
v. 8-10 What Paul means by born out of due time is born again, as an apostle. The other apostles came
in due time - believing into Jesus from the beginning, so as to be His eyewitnesses. But Paul became a
witness to Jesus later - much later - for initially, he had hardened his heart against Jesus, and persecuted His
followers. It took an act of God to penetrate Pauls heart - but what a heart for God came out of it!
So Paul was indeed a unique apostle; not one of the Twelve, but an apostle like them, born out of due time.
The fact that God called him to be an apostle, after all that had gone before, caused Paul to pour himself
out in serving the Lord - his response to this abounding grace that God had shown him. His ministry was
truly a labor of love.
Being born out of due time, Paul calls himself the least of the apostles here. But in no respect did Paul fall
short, as a called apostle.
Turn to Second Corinthians chapter 12. Paul was again writing to the Corinthians, some of whom still at
this time took issue with his apostleship. Well begin in verse 11.
[Second Corinthians 12:11-12]
v. 11 Paul boasting was a matter of him laying out further evidences of his apostleship - which he points
out shouldnt be necessary to do with the Corinthians, since he was clearly manifest as a chosen apostle of
the Lord, when among them. Paul goes on to make mention of one of these manifestations.

# 34: 7-3-15 E

v. 12 Paul is saying that throughout his tenure in Corinth, the Lord authenticated his apostleship through
miracles - the signs of an apostle.
[Return to First Corinthians 9]
So Paul was reminding the Corinthians of his unique, but completely authentic calling as an apostle, by the
Lord Jesus Himself. In verse 2, Paul says the believers in Corinth are the seal of his apostleship. A seal
was impressed as the guarantee that something was genuine. It was the mark of authenticity.
The believers in Corinth have the proof in hand of the authenticity of Pauls apostleship - they are the proof;
they are the guarantee that Paul is a genuine apostle appointed by the Lord Jesus Christ.
Those who truly believed had the proof of the peace that they now had, in their lives. And they had a sense
of purpose, and direction.
And they had light - they had the Holy Spirit - and He was enlightening them as to the thinking of God.
That was becoming their thinking, more and more. So with this new mind on things, and a new heart for
God, they were beginning to live a righteous life - for the first time ever.
They could see the difference in themselves, and in each other - the power that they now had, over sin.
What a joy it was! It was a joy, and it was a proof - of an apostle fulfilling his commission. Here they were,
Pauls work, in the Lord - his labor of love. No true believer in Corinth could doubt it.
So Paul has shown irrefutably that he is indeed a chosen apostle of the Lord. He will follow this up with a
spirited defense of his rights, as an apostle - and then go on to reveal why it is that he had relinquished
those rights.
Reading: 1 Cor 9 + 10.