TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers 1 Corinthians 9:3–14. His two-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
Having asserted his apostolical authority, he proceeds to claim the rights belonging to his office, especially that of being maintained by it.
I.These he states, Co1 9:3-6.
"My answer to those that do examine me (that is, enquire into my authority, or the reasons of my conduct, if I am an apostle) is this: Have we not power to eat and drink (Co1 9:4), or a right to maintenance? Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas; and, not only to be maintained ourselves, but have them maintained also?" Though Paul was at that time single, he had a right to take a wife when he pleased, and to lead her about with him, and expect a maintenance for her, as well as himself, from the churches. Perhaps Barnabas had a wife, as the other apostles certainly had, and led them about with them. For that a wife is here to be understood by the sister - woman - adelphēn gunaika, is plain from this, that it would have been utterly unfit for the apostles to have carried about women with them unless they were wives. The word implies that they had power over them, and could require their attendance on them, which none could have over any but wives or servants. Now the apostles, who worked for their bread, do not seem to have been in a capacity to buy or have servants to carry with them. Not to observe that it would have raised suspicion to have carried about even women-servants, and much more other women to whom they were not married, for which the apostles would never give any occasion. The apostle therefore plainly asserts he had a right to marry as well as other apostles, and claim a maintenance for his wife, nay, and his children too, if he had any, from the churches, without labouring with his own hands to procure it. Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to for bear working? Co1 9:6. In short, the apostle here claims a maintenance from the churches, both for him and his. This was due from them, and what he might claim.
II.He proceeds, by several arguments, to prove his claim.
1.From the common practice and expectations of mankind. Those who addict and give themselves up to any way of business in the world expect to live out of it. Soldiers expect to be paid for their service. Husbandmen and shepherds expect to get a livelihood out of their labours. If they plant vineyards, and dress and cultivate them, it is with expectation of fruit; if they feed a flock, it is with the expectation of being fed and clothed by it! Who goeth a warfare at any time at his own charge? Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not the fruit thereof? Who feedeth a flock, and eateth not the milk thereof? Co1 9:7-9. Note, It is very natural, and very reasonable, for ministers to expect a livelihood out of their labours.
2.He argues it out of the Jewish law: Say I these things as a man? Or saith not the law the same also? Co1 9:8. Is this merely a dictate of common reason and according to common usage only? No, it is also consonant to the old law. God had therein ordered that the ox should not be muzzled while he was treading out the corn, nor hindered from eating while he was preparing the corn for man's use, and treading it out of the ear. But this law was not chiefly given out of God's regard to oxen, or concern for them, but to teach mankind that all due encouragement should be given to those who are employed by us, or labouring for our good - that the labourers should taste of the fruit of their labours. Those who plough should plough in hope; and those who thresh in hope should be partakers of their hope, Co1 9:10. The law saith this about oxen for our sakes. Note, Those that lay themselves out to do our souls good should not have their mouths muzzled, but have food provided for them.
3.He argues from common equity: If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? What they had sown was much better than they expected to reap. They had taught them the way to eternal life, and laboured heartily to put them in possession of it. It was no great matter, surely, while they were giving themselves up to this work, to expect a support of their own temporal life. They had been instruments of conveying to them the greater spiritual blessings; and had they no claim to as great a share in their carnal things as was necessary to subsist them? Note, Those who enjoy spiritual benefits by the ministry of the word should not grudge a maintenance to such as are employed in this work. If they have received a real benefit, one would think they could not grudge them this. What, get so much good by them, and yet grudge to do so little good to them! Is this grateful or equitable?
4.He argues from the maintenance they afforded others: "If others are partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? You allow others this maintenance, and confess their claim just; but who has so just a claim as I from the church of Corinth? Who has given greater evidence of the apostolic mission? Who had laboured so much for your good, or done like service among you?" Note, Ministers should be valued and provided for according to their worth. "Nevertheless," says the apostle, "we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. We have not insisted on our right, but have rather been in straits to serve the interests of the gospel, and promote the salvation of souls." He renounced his right, rather than by claiming it he would hinder his success. He denied himself, for fear of giving offence; but asserted his right lest his self-denial should prove prejudicial to the ministry. Note, He is likely to plead most effectually for the rights of others who shows a generous disregard to his own. It is plain, in this case, that justice, and not self-love, is the principle by which he is actuated.
5.He argues from the old Jewish establishment: "Do you not know that those who minister about holy things live of the things of the temple, and those who wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Co1 9:13. And, if the Jewish priesthood was maintained out of the holy things that were then offered, shall not Christ's ministers have a maintenance out of their ministry? Is there not as much reason that we should be maintained as they?" He asserts it to be the institution of Christ: "Even so hath the Lord ordained that those who preach the gospel should live of the gospel (Co1 9:14), should have a right to a maintenance, though not bound to demand it, and insist upon it." It is the people's duty to maintain their minister, by Christ's appointment, though it be not a duty bound on every minister to call for or accept it. He may waive his right, as Paul did, without being a sinner; but those transgress an appointment of Christ who deny or withhold it. Those who preach the gospel have a right to live by it; and those who attend on their ministry, and yet take no thought about their subsistence, fail very much in their duty to Christ, and respect owing to them.
Historical interpretation
Two Centuries of Reception
3 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
"For if any of such meats make a brother to stumble, I shall not eat it as long as the world lasts," says he, "that I may not make my brother stumble." I gain the man by a little self-restraint. "Have we not power to eat and to drink?"
This is what Paul meant when he said that all things were lawful to him.
"Have we no right to eat and to drink? Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer?"
Why, how are these sayings a defence? "Because, when it appears that I abstain even from things which are allowed, it cannot be just to look suspiciously on me as a deceiver or one acting for gain."
Wherefore, from what was before alleged and from my having instructed you and from this which I have now said, I have matter sufficient to make my defence to you: and all who examine me I meet upon this ground, alleging both what has gone before and this which follows: "Have we no right to eat and to drink? have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer?" Yet for all this, having it I abstain?
What then? did he not use to eat or to drink? It were most true to say that in many places he really did not eat nor drink: for "in hunger," saith he, "and in thirst, and in nakedness" we were abiding. Here, however, this is not his meaning; but what? "We eat not nor drink, receiving of those whom we instruct, though we have a right so to receive."
"Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the Apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?" Observe his skilfulness. The leader of the choir stands last in his arrangement: since that is the time for laying down the strongest of all one's topics. Nor was it so wonderful for one to be able to point out examples of this conduct in the rest, as in the foremost champion and in him who was entrusted with the keys of heaven. But neither does he mention Peter alone, but all of them: as if he had said, Whether you seek the inferior sort or the more eminent, in all you find patterns of this sort.
For the brethren too of the Lord, being freed from their first unbelief, had come to be among those who were approved, although they attained not to the Apostles. And accordingly the middle place is that which he hath assigned to them, setting down those who were in the extremes before and after.
Continue studying 1 Corinthians 9:4 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
In 1 Corinthians 9:4, the Apostle Paul employs a rhetorical question to assert the inherent and legitimate right of himself and other apostles to receive material support, specifically food and drink, from those to whom they minister. This verse serves as the foundational premise for Paul's subsequent argument in chapter 9, where he defends his apostolic authority and explains his intentional decision to waive these legitimate rights for the greater advancement and unhindered proclamation of the Gospel.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is strategically positioned at the outset of Paul's defense of his apostleship and his rights as an evangelist, following his discussions on Christian liberty and food sacrificed to idols in chapters 8. Chapter 9 begins with Paul establishing his credentials as an apostle, having seen the risen Lord and being the spiritual father of the Corinthian believers (1 Corinthians 9:1-2). The rhetorical question in 1 Corinthians 9:4 immediately introduces the concept of ministerial rights, which he then supports with various analogies from everyday life (soldiers, vineyard keepers, shepherds, oxen treading grain) and Old Testament law (1 Corinthians 9:7-11). The subsequent verses reveal his deliberate choice to forgo these rights, not because they are illegitimate, but for the sake of the Gospel's effectiveness among the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 9:12-18).
Historical & Cultural Context
In the Greco-Roman world, it was common practice for teachers, philosophers, and rhetoricians to receive payment from their students or patrons. Paul, however, often chose to work with his hands (e.g., tentmaking, as seen in Acts 18:3) to support himself, a practice that distinguished him from many itinerant teachers of his day. This choice, while admirable to some, may have led others in Corinth to question his legitimacy or the value of his message, as paid teachers were often seen as more authoritative. Furthermore, the Corinthian church itself was plagued by divisions and factions (1 Corinthians 1:10-17), and some members likely held differing views on the financial support of spiritual leaders, possibly even viewing Paul's self-sufficiency as a sign of weakness or a lack of confidence in his own message. Paul's argument here is thus a robust defense of his apostolic authority and rights, even as he explains his personal decision to not exercise them.
Key Themes
1 Corinthians 9 primarily explores the themes of apostolic authority and rights, emphasizing that those who minister the Gospel have a legitimate claim to material support from those they serve. This principle is rooted in both common sense and Old Testament law, as Paul demonstrates in 1 Corinthians 9:7-11. However, a more profound theme is self-denial and sacrifice for the sake of the Gospel. Paul's decision to forgo his rights, particularly financial support, highlights his unwavering commitment to remove any potential stumbling block to the spread of the Good News (1 Corinthians 9:12). This embodies the broader Christian principle of loving concern for others and prioritizing their spiritual well-being over personal convenience or entitlement, a theme echoed in Paul's discussion of Christian liberty in 1 Corinthians 8.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This term, while often translated as "power," carries the primary sense of "privilege," "right," "authority," or "liberty." Paul is not questioning their physical ability to eat and drink, but rather their legitimate claim or entitlement to be provided for. It denotes a sanctioned freedom or jurisdiction, indicating that apostles possess a divine warrant for their sustenance.
A primary verb meaning "to eat," literally or figuratively. In this context, it refers to the consumption of food, representing the basic necessity of sustenance. Coupled with "drink," it signifies the fundamental provision required for survival and, by extension, for full-time ministry.
A primary verb meaning "to imbibe" or "to drink." Like "eat," it denotes a basic physical need. Together, "to eat and to drink" form a common idiom for receiving full provision and livelihood, implying not just the act of consumption but the right to be supplied with all that is necessary for life and work.
Verse Breakdown
"Have we not power"
This is a rhetorical question, signaled by the Greek negative particles mḕ ouk (G3378), which expects a strong affirmative answer. Paul is not genuinely asking if they lack the right, but rather asserting that they do indeed possess it. The "we" refers to Paul and Barnabas, and by extension, other apostles and ministers of the Gospel, as indicated by the subsequent verses. The "power" (exousía) here is not brute strength but the legitimate authority or right to be supported.
"to eat and to drink?"
This phrase functions as a merism, where two parts represent the whole. "Eating and drinking" signifies the entirety of material sustenance and provision, including food, drink, and by extension, financial support for their livelihood. Paul is asserting the right of apostles to be financially supported by the communities they serve, enabling them to dedicate themselves fully to their ministry without needing to work secular jobs for their basic needs.
Literary Devices
The primary literary device employed in 1 Corinthians 9:4 is a Rhetorical Question. Paul uses the interrogative "Have we not...?" not to elicit information, but to make a forceful assertion. The expected answer is a resounding "Yes, you do have that power/right!" This technique immediately engages the audience and sets the stage for his subsequent argument, making his point more impactful than a direct statement would have been. Additionally, the phrase "to eat and to drink" functions as a Merism, where two contrasting or complementary parts (eating and drinking) are used to represent a complete whole, in this case, full material provision and livelihood. This concise phrasing efficiently conveys the comprehensive nature of the apostles' right to sustenance.
Theological and Thematic Connections
The assertion of a minister's right to material support, as seen in 1 Corinthians 9:4, is a foundational principle woven throughout Scripture, establishing a divine pattern for the sustenance of those dedicated to spiritual labor. This right is not merely a human convention but reflects God's design for the propagation of His message, ensuring that those who sow spiritual seed can reap material benefits, thereby freeing them to fully devote themselves to the ministry of the Word and prayer. This principle underscores the value God places on the proclamation of the Gospel and the care of His servants, recognizing that full-time ministry requires full-time provision.
Reflection and Application
1 Corinthians 9:4 invites us to reflect on the biblical principle of supporting those who minister the Gospel, recognizing that their dedication to spiritual labor warrants material provision. For the church today, this means actively and generously supporting pastors, missionaries, and other full-time Christian workers, enabling them to focus on their calling without the burden of financial insecurity. However, the broader context of 1 Corinthians 9 also challenges believers to consider when it might be appropriate to forgo legitimate rights for the sake of the Gospel's advancement or to avoid causing offense. This requires discernment, humility, and a deep love for Christ and others, prioritizing the spiritual well-being of the community over personal convenience or entitlement. It calls us to emulate Paul's Christ-like example of selfless service, always asking how our choices can best serve the Kingdom of God and prevent any hindrance to the Good News.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Does Paul's assertion of his "power to eat and to drink" mean all ministers must receive financial support?
While 1 Corinthians 9:4 clearly establishes the legitimate right of ministers to receive financial and material support from those they serve, it does not mandate that all ministers must exercise this right. Paul himself, in the very next verses, explains his deliberate choice to forgo this right for the sake of the Gospel (1 Corinthians 9:12). The passage teaches that the right to support exists, rooted in divine principle (1 Corinthians 9:14), but the exercise of that right can be a matter of Spirit-led discernment, prioritizing the unhindered spread of the Gospel above personal convenience or entitlement. Thus, churches are obligated to be ready to support their ministers, and ministers have the right to receive it, but they may, like Paul, choose to waive it for strategic Kingdom purposes.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While 1 Corinthians 9:4 speaks to the rights of apostles and ministers, its deeper Christ-centered fulfillment lies not in the assertion of rights, but in the ultimate example of self-denial and sacrifice embodied by Jesus Christ Himself. Paul's willingness to forgo his legitimate rights for the sake of the Gospel profoundly mirrors Christ's own kenosis, His "emptying" of Himself. Though He was God, Jesus "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men" (Philippians 2:6-7). He, who had every right to divine glory and honor, chose instead to become poor for our sakes, "that you through his poverty might be rich" (2 Corinthians 8:9). The Lamb of God, who came not to be served but to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45), perfectly exemplifies the principle of sacrificing personal rights and privileges for the greater good of others and the advancement of God's redemptive plan. Paul's example, therefore, is a Christ-like one, demonstrating that true authority and power in the Kingdom are often expressed through humble service and self-sacrifice, ultimately pointing to the supreme sacrifice of Christ on the cross, which secured our eternal provision and liberation from sin (John 3:16).