Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Corinthians 9:6
Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
6. Or I only and Barnabas ] St Paul and St Barnabas (1) resigned their claim to support on the part of the Church, (2) they were not of the number of the twelve, (3) they were left by the Apostles to undertake the sole charge of the missions to the heathen (Gal 2:9). On these grounds a charge was brought against them that they were no true Apostles of Christ. For Barnabas, see Act 4:36; Act 11:22; Act 11:25; Act 11:29; Act 12:25; Act 13:1-2; Act 13:50; Act 14:12; Act 15:2; Act 15:12; Act 15:37; Gal 2:1; Gal 2:9; Gal 2:13.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Or I only and Barnabas – Paul and Barnabas had worked together as tent-makers at Corinth; Act 18:3. From this fact it had been inferred that they knew that they had no claim to a support.
Power to forbear working – To abstain from labor, and to receive support as others do. The question implies a strong affirmation that they had such power. The sense is, Why should I and Barnabas be regarded as having no right to support? Have we been less faithful than others? Have we done less? Have we given fewer evidences that we are sent by the Lord, or that God approves us in our work? Have we been less successful? Why then should we be singled out; and why should it be supposed that we are obliged to labor for our support? Is there no other conceivable reason why we should support ourselves than a consciousness that we have no right to support from the people with whom we labor? It is evident from 1Co 9:12, that Barnabas as well as Paul relinquished his right to a support, and labored to maintain himself. And it is manifest from the whole passage, that there was some special spleen (Doddridge) against these two ministers of the gospel. What it was we know not. It might have arisen from the enmity and opposition of Judaizing teachers, who were offended at their zeal and success among the Gentiles, and who could find no other cause of complaint against them than that they chose to support themselves, and not live in idleness, or to tax the church for their support. That must have been a bad cause which was sustained by such an argument.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 6. Or I only and Barnabas] Have we alone of all the apostles no right to be supported by our converts? It appears from this,
1. That the apostles did not generally support themselves by their own labour.
2. That Paul and Barnabas did thus support themselves.
Some of the others probably had not a business at which they could conveniently work; but Paul and Barnabas had a trade at which they could conveniently labour wherever they came.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Are I and Barnabas the only apostles who are obliged for our livelihood to work with our hands? As Paul did, Act 18:3, making tents. We certainly, as well as the rest of the apostles, if we would run out to the utmost end of the line of our liberty in things, without having any regard to the circumstances of our brethren, might forbear working with our hands, and expect that those amongst whom we labour should maintain us.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
6. Barnabaslong the associateof Paul, and, like him, in the habit of self-denyingly forbearing toclaim the maintenance which is a minister’s right. So Paul supportedhimself by tent-making (Act 18:3;Act 20:34; 1Th 2:9;2Th 3:8).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Or I only and Barnabas,…. Who were for a great while companions and fellow travellers; are we alone? are we exempted from those rights and privileges, common to others?
have not we power to forbear working? that is, with their hands, at their trades and occupations, to get their living by: Paul worked at his trade, and so it seems Barnabas did likewise: Paul wrought with his hands at Corinth, in company with Aquila and Priscilla, they being tentmakers as he, Ac 18:3 and so he did in other places; he appeals for the truth of this to the elders of the church at Ephesus, Ac 20:34 and to the church of the Thessalonians, 1Th 2:9 not but that he had a right and power to leave off business, to forbear working, and require a maintenance from those to whom he ministered; but for some reasons he chose not to make use of this his power and liberty, because he would not be chargeable to them; and lest that upon his first preaching the Gospel to them, they should think he had worldly selfish ends in view, and not the good of souls, and glory of Christ; however, he hereby lets them know, that though Barnabas and he continued to get their bread by their own hand labour, they had a right to quit their trades, and throw themselves upon them for a maintenance. The apostle seems, in this, to imitate the ancient, wise, and holy men of his nation, who taught the law freely, and took nothing for it; not that they thought it was unlawful, or that they had no right to a maintenance on account of it, but for the honour of religion, and that piety they professed; and lest the law should be thought to be made a trade of, they chose not to insist upon it d.
d Maimon. & Bartenora in Pirke Abot, c. 4. sect. 5.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Have we not a right to forbear working? ( ;). By (or) Paul puts the other side about Barnabas (the only allusion since the dispute in Ac 15:39, but in good spirit) and himself. Perhaps (Hofmann) Paul has in mind the fact that in the first great mission tour (1Cor 9:13; 1Cor 9:14), Barnabas and Paul received no help from the church in Antioch, but were left to work their way along at their own charges. It was not till the Philippian Church took hold that Paul had financial aid (Php 4:15). Here both negatives have their full force. Literally, Do we not have ( , expecting the affirmative reply) the right not (, negative of the infinitive ) to do manual labour (usual meaning of as in 4:12)?” There was no more compulsion on Paul and Barnabas to support themselves than upon the other workers for Christ. They renounced no rights in being voluntarily independent.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Barnabas. The only mention of Barnabas along with Paul since the quarrel, Act 14:39.
Forbear working. For their own support. Ergazesqai to work, is the regular word for manual labor. See Mt 21:28; Act 18:3. See on 3Jo 1:5; and trade, Rev 18:17.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) Or I only and Barnabas.” (e monos ego kai Barnabas) Barnabas had sold all that he had – sold out wholly to do God’s work, Act 4:36. Though Paul and Barnabas later parted Barnabas’ name was honored, Act 15:39.
2) “Have we not power to forbear working? (ouk echomen eksousian me ergasesthai?) “Have we not the right or authority by virtue of our greater services to forego manual labor?” Though both had labored in the craft of teaching prior to their missionary labors, they still taught and labored as surely and worthily on the mission field, Act 13:11; 1Ti 5:17
THE MINISTRY TO BE SUPPORTED
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(6) Or I only and Barnabas.Or here does not introduce a question which implies a new right in addition to the rights already claimed, but it completes the argument. Granting the existence of the rights established by the previous questions, the Apostle now saysstill preserving the interrogative formThese things being so, the only way you can possibly do away with this right is by making exceptions of myself and Barnabas. The form in which the question is put shows the impossibility of any such arbitrary exception being made. They as well as the others had the right to abstain from working for their living. Barnabas early association with St. Paul (Act. 11:30; Act. 12:25; Act. 15:38) probably led him to adopt the Apostles practice of supporting himself, and not being dependent on his fellow-Christians. The word only implies that all the other Apostles and brethren of the Lord exercised their right of maintenance by the Church.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
6. Barnabas Note on Act 15:39. It would appear that though Barnabas never visited Corinth, yet his name was familiar there. This is, indeed, probably true of most of the personages mentioned in the preceding verse. Indeed, the Corinthians seem to have been lively and critical canvassers of the eminent Christian leaders. Probably the fact that Barnabas was commissioned by the Gentile Church of Antioch (Act 13:2) at the same time with Paul, would bring his name into the discussion. The Judaizers would maintain that the apostolic authority of both was equally illegitimate, having neither come from Christ nor started from Jerusalem. The inference drawn by some commentators, that Barnabas, like Paul, maintained himself by his own manual labour, is not valid. During the first apostolic tour, in which Barnabas and Paul were associated, their career appears to have been too rapid for such labour, and nothing of the kind is intimated in the narrative. Paul here asserts only Barnabas’s right; not that he declined to use the right.
Forbear working Working at manual labour for our support while we preach a gratuitous Gospel. Is it I and Barnabas alone that must preach for nothing, and support ourselves?
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
1Co 9:6. Or I only, and Barnabas From this expression one would think that the Judaizing Christians, who were the main cause of St. Paul’s uneasiness in this respect, had a peculiar spleen against these two Apostles of the uncircumcision; who were so instrumental in procuring and publishing theJerusalem decree, which determined the controversy so directly in favour of the believing Gentiles. It seems probable, from 1Co 9:12, that Barnabas supported himself by the labour of his hands when at Corinth, as well as St. Paul. See Wall, Whitby, and Calmet.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Co 9:6 . ] or , i.e. unless it were true that , etc. In that case, indeed, the , of which I spoke in 1Co 9:4-5 , must of course be wanting! We have therefore no third introduced here (Pott, Rckert), but conveys an argument , as it usually does.
] see on Act 4:36 . He was formerly (see on Act 15:38 ) Paul’s companion in his missionary labours, and as such held a high apostolic position (Gal 2:9 ).
.] Have we not the right to cease from working ? Paul supported himself by tent-making (Act 18:3 ); in what way Barnabas did so, is unknown. Both of them, very probably, after mutual consultation, had laid it down as a principle to maintain themselves by their own independent labour, and acted upon this rule even when working separately, whereas the rest of the apostolic teachers (see ) claimed support from the resources of the churches. is the word constantly used for working , 2Th 3:8 ; Act 18:3 ; Homer, Il. xviii. 469, Od. xiv. 272; Xen. Cyr. i. 6. 11, al [1417] The rendering: hoc operandi (Vulgate and Latin Fathers), arises from a different reading (without the ).
[1417] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
Ver. 6. To forbear working ] At our trade? Yes, or else I should easily be of Melancthon’s mind, who when one had said of the ministry, that it was the art of arts, and the science of sciences; if he had added (said Melancthon) that it is the misery of miseries, he had hit the nail on the head. (Joh. Manl. loc. com. 471.)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
6. ] Or (implying what the consequence would then be, see ch. 1Co 6:2 ; 1Co 6:9 ; does not introduce a new , but a consequence of the denial of the last two) have only I and Barnabas (why Barnabas? Perhaps on account of his former connexion with Paul, Act 11:30 ; Act 12:25 ; Act 13:1 to Act 15:39 ; but this seems hardly enough reason for his being here introduced. It is not improbable that having been at first associated with Paul, who appears from the first to have abstained from receiving sustenance from those among whom he was preaching, Barnabas, after his separation from our Apostle, may have retained the same self-denying practice. “This is the only time when he is mentioned in conjunction with St. Paul, since the date of the quarrel in Act 15:39 .” Stanley) not power to abstain from working (i.e. power to look for our maintenance from the churches, without manual labour of our own. The Vulg. has ‘ hoc operandi ,’ so also Tertull., Ambrose, al., omitting , and against the usage of , see reff.)?
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Barnabas. It would appear then that Barnabas adopted the same method as Paul, of working for his living.
to forbear working = of not (Greek. me) working.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
6.] Or (implying what the consequence would then be, see ch. 1Co 6:2; 1Co 6:9; does not introduce a new , but a consequence of the denial of the last two) have only I and Barnabas (why Barnabas? Perhaps on account of his former connexion with Paul, Act 11:30; Act 12:25; Act 13:1 to Act 15:39; but this seems hardly enough reason for his being here introduced. It is not improbable that having been at first associated with Paul, who appears from the first to have abstained from receiving sustenance from those among whom he was preaching, Barnabas, after his separation from our Apostle, may have retained the same self-denying practice. This is the only time when he is mentioned in conjunction with St. Paul, since the date of the quarrel in Act 15:39. Stanley) not power to abstain from working (i.e. power to look for our maintenance from the churches, without manual labour of our own. The Vulg. has hoc operandi, so also Tertull., Ambrose, al., omitting , and against the usage of , see reff.)?
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Co 9:6. ), to forbear working with the hand.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Co 9:6
1Co 9:6
Or I only and Barnabas, have we not a right to forbear working?-Not only had they the right to marry if they saw fit, but they had a right to forbear laboring with their hands for support and to call on the brethren to support them in the work to which they were called. [The word only here implies that the other apostles and the brethren of the Lord exercised their right to be maintained by the church.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Barnabas: Act 4:36, Act 11:22, Act 13:1, Act 13:2, Act 13:50, Act 14:12, Act 15:36, Act 15:37
have: 1Co 4:11, 1Co 4:12, Act 18:3, Act 20:34, Act 20:35, 1Th 2:9, 2Th 3:7-9
Reciprocal: 2Ki 6:2 – and take thence Neh 10:36 – unto Jer 20:7 – thou art Joh 21:3 – I go Act 9:27 – Barnabas Act 14:14 – the apostles 1Co 9:18 – when 2Co 11:7 – in 2Co 12:13 – I myself Gal 2:1 – Barnabas 1Th 2:6 – when
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Co 9:6. Paul narrows his discussion to himself and Barnabas. Forbear working means not to labor with their hands to obtain the necessities of life.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Co 9:6. Or I only and Barnabas, have we not a right to forbear working?for our maintenance, leaving our support to the churches we serve. The reasonableness of this as a principle is now illustrated from the case of (1) soldiers, (2) husbandmen, (3) shepherds, (4) the Levitical priests.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
1Co 9:6-7. Or I only and Barnabas Of all the preachers of the gospel; have not we power to forbear working With our hands? From this it appears that Barnabas, as well as Paul, preached the gospel without demanding a maintenance from his disciples; and that, like Paul, he was hated for his doctrine by the Judaizers. The honourable mention which Paul makes of Barnabas in this passage deserves notice, as it shows that these good men, notwithstanding their sharp contention about John Mark, Act 15:13, entertained no resentment against each other on that account, but mutually esteemed each other: and perhaps, on some occasions after that, preached the gospel together, as before. Who goeth a warfare Serveth in the war; at any time, at his own charges Does not the community furnish provisions for those who guard it, and fight its battles? And if the services of a soldier, engaged in the defence of his country, deserve a maintenance, how much more may it be expected by us, who daily hazard our lives, as well as wear them out, for mens everlasting happiness? Who planteth a vineyard, and doth not think himself entitled to eat of the fruit of it? or who feedeth a flock, and doth not think he hath a right to eat of the milk of the flock? And if it be judged reasonable that men should have an equivalent for their labours about natural things, and the accommodations of the body, is it not more evidently so when the felicity of immortal souls is concerned?
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vv. 6. The conj. , or, has here the meaning which it so frequently has in Paul’s writings: Or indeed in the opposite case would it happen that…?
No doubt Barnabas had not been called to the apostleship by the Lord, in the same way as Paul (1Co 9:1); but, by his co-operation in the work of the apostle of the Gentiles, he was included, as it were, in his apostleship. Yet there remains an important difference between him and Paul, a difference which comes out in a characteristic way, by the application of the adjective , only, exclusively to Paul. It is exactly the same relation as is supposed by Galatians 2 (comparing especially 1Co 9:8-9).
The term working receives a determinate sense from the context: gaining one’s livelihood by his work. Some Latin authorities omit the negative and translate: to do so, that is to say, to live at your cost. This meaning of the word is impossible.
To this historical argument, taken from the example of the apostles, Paul adds a second, borrowed from common right.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Or I only and Barnabas [Though not one of the twelve, he is called an apostle (Act 14:14), for he was a messenger or apostle of the Holy Spirit, and of the church at Antioch (Act 13:2) and was associated with Paul (Gal 2:9). His name was illustrious enough at Corinth to give countenance to Paul’s course. If Barnabas and Paul wrought out their self-support to be nobly independent, did their voluntary sacrifice of rights abolish those rights, or prove that they never existed? This late reference to Barnabas is interesting, for it shows that he was still at work and was still loved of Paul despite their disagreement concerning John Mark. Having thus proved his right to maintenance by the example of other church leaders, Paul now goes on to give an argument in six heads showing that the practice of these leaders was wholly lawful and proper. First argument: Wages for service is the rule in all employment; in proof of this, three instances are cited, the soldier, the vine-dresser, the shepherd], have we not a right to forbear working?
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 6
Working; laboring for their support, as Paul was accustomed to do. (Acts 18:3,20:34.)
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
9:6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to {f} forbear working?
(f) Not live by the works of our hands.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
The Corinthians had acknowledged the right of the other apostles to refrain from secular employment. Paul and Barnabas chose to work with their hands at times so their financial support would not burden their converts (1Co 4:12; 1Th 2:9; 2Th 3:7-9; Act 20:34). Evidently the practice of Barnabas was well known. Paul had stooped to the demeaning work (in the Corinthians’ eyes) of making tents while he ministered in Corinth (Act 18:3). Apparently some of the Corinthian Christians took Paul’s action as an indication that he did not think of himself as worthy of support because he was not equal with the other apostles.