In 1 Corinthians 9:1-14, the apostle Paul defends his right to earn a living from the preaching of the gospel. But this passage appears within his instruction regarding Christian liberty, the adiaphora or things indifferent, that is, things that God neither commands nor forbids. In chapter 8 the apostle had taught that eating food sacrificed to idols was not wrong in itself, but that the Corinthians should take into account the consciences of their weaker brothers. He returns to that subject in chapter 10:23: “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful.” Why did he digress in chapter 9?
The answer to the question is that this is not altogether a digression but, at least in part, another illustration of the proper use of Christian liberty. However, this particular illustration demonstrates an important point: that some matters may be indifferent considered from one perspective and commanded considered from another. Thus the support of the ministry of the gospel is an obligation to those who hear the gospel, but also a right to the preachers that they may surrender or treat as a thing indifferent.
A large part of the passage (vv. 6-14) explains why preachers have the right to earn a living from their work or, as Paul puts it, a “right to refrain from working” at a secondary job, such as tent-making, to earn a living. Paul presents at least five arguments. 1) Every laborer rightly expects compensation for his work. Soldiers do not go to war at their own expense, planters of vineyards eat the fruit of the vineyard, and shepherds drink from the milk of the flock (v. 7). 2) The law of Moses commanded Israel not to muzzle the ox that threshes the grain. This establishes the principle that the laborer is worthy of his wages (vv. 8-10). 3) The spiritual things the hearers of the gospel receive are far more valuable than the material things the preachers receive in return (v. 11). 4) The Corinthians themselves have implicitly acknowledged this rule by supporting other preachers (v. 12). 5) The priests and Levites received the tithes and portions of the sacrifices for their support while they ministered in the temple (v. 13). “The Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel” (v. 14).
For those who hear the preaching of the gospel, supporting preachers is not a thing indifferent but an ordinance of God. They may not deprive preachers of that right.
Nevertheless, Paul had not received support from the Corinthians for his preaching. Instead, he had “robbed other churches, taking wages from them to minister to you” (2 Cor. 11:8). “Nevertheless we [Paul and Barnabas] have not used this right, but endure all things lest we hinder the gospel of Christ” (1 Cor. 9:12). To Paul the right to earn a living from the preaching of the gospel did not imply an obligation. He could, without sin, surrender his right. It was a thing indifferent for him but not for the Corinthians.
Food sacrificed to idols is a thing indifferent in itself, neither right nor wrong. Or, to put it another way, sinful only for those whose consciences are weak and do not yet have the knowledge necessary to receive such food as a gift from God. But supporting preachers is not a thing indifferent in itself. It is an ordinance of God for those who are benefiting from the preaching, but a right that may be voluntarily surrendered by the preacher. Paul had done exactly that for the sake of the gospel.
Perhaps Paul saw that circumcision in the early years of the New Testament church was similar. It was commanded for the Jews during Old Testament times, but had to be given up in the New Testament. Bloody rites have no place in the covenant sealed with the blood of Christ shed once for all, and God brought all those bloody rites to a decisive end in the destruction of Jerusalem. Nevertheless, he gave the Jews time to adjust to New Testament realities, to instruct their weak consciences in the changes realized by Christ’s death.
But he also forbade the Jews to impose their ceremonial law on the Gentiles. Paul fiercely resisted any Jewish attempt to the contrary. From the viewpoint of the Jews, therefore, it was not a thing indifferent. God allowed them to continue the practice for a time so that their consciences could adjust to new realities, but any Jew, like Paul, whose conscience had been freed from the burden of the ceremonial law, was free to abandon its practice. Paul says, “to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win the Jews… to those who are without law as without law… that I might win those who are without law” (1 Cor. 9:20-21). He practiced the ceremonial law among the Jews so as not to offend their weak consciences, but he did not practice it among the Gentiles where no such offense would occur. Timothy’s circumcision demonstrated it. Timothy would be working among Jews where uncircumcision would be a stumbling block. Not because the law required it but for the sake of the gospel, Paul circumcised him. Circumcision was a thing indifferent to him as long as it was clearly understood that it and the whole ceremonial law were no longer in force.
These examples help us to understand further the scope and proper practice of Christian liberty and the use of things indifferent. Some things are indifferent in themselves. Others, like preachers earning a living from the preaching, are indifferent to some but not to others. Still others, like circumcision, are indifferent if the user attaches no religious significance to them, but forbidden if the user attaches such religious significance. God’s mercy permits some accommodation for weak consciences and for their sake even restricts the liberty of the strong, but he also expects the weak to learn and grow so that they may make full use of their liberty in Christ.