Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the assemblies of Galatia, so do *ye* do also.
Paul ends this letter with money: a fund the Gentile congregations were gathering for poor believers in Jerusalem. His wording assumes the readers already know of it, and points them to a pattern he had set elsewhere.
Money comes at the end of this letter, not at the start.
Paul's last direction in this letter is about the special collection then being made for poor believers in Judaea. Today in many religious circles money is so often the first topic. Here it is the last. Still it comes in, and he gives instructions of lasting value.
Critics have made the opening phrase of this verse an easy target.
Opponents of the gospel have said, with irony, that there is one point on which every warring sect agrees. They mean the words of Scripture, "Now concerning the collection" (1 Cor. 16:1). The irony bites because the appeals on behalf of Christian work are so frequent. But suppose each Christian gave to the Lord, and not just to a cause. Then there would be no difficulty in finding what the Lord's work needs.
These poor believers lived in Jerusalem. Their poverty had a history, and part of it was the price of their own generosity.
One cannot overlook how often the poor believers at Jerusalem were remembered. No doubt their circumstances gave them a special claim. Outward hardship was probably common, and persecution had left some widows and orphans. The believers there were not only very many. They alone, so far as we read, had sold their possessions and goods to give to all, as anyone had need... Later, poverty took hold there, partly through this surprising witness of unselfish love. And no one among the Gentile assemblies urged help for the believers in Judaea more than Paul did — not only during the great famine under Claudius Caesar, but from then on.
A collection can support those who teach, or relieve those in need. The Jerusalem fund was the second kind.
We may rightly have collections to meet the need of the Lord's gifted servants, from whom we receive spiritual help. But there are times when we also need collections for the poor of the flock. The special need of the believers at Jerusalem at that time was a case in point... From Jerusalem the gospel had gone out to the Gentiles. The Gentile converts had received spiritual things, so it was only right that they should give of their material things.
Paul tells Corinth to do what he had already told Galatia. One writer draws a wider principle from that.
It is untrue that the apostle left the assemblies without regulation, or that he regulated them differently. The dangers and the circumstances of Galatia were as unlike those of Corinth as anyone could imagine. Yet the apostle gave both the same directions. And not only on matters of the greatest importance — sound doctrine, holy discipline, and the institutions Christ gave to bear witness to Himself, so that the worship and public ways of the saints would give the same testimony everywhere. Here too, as we see, he gave the same direction even in the way they gave.
Some say the verse covers only a local matter of that day. The answer comes back as a question.
Now, someone may say that this passage referred to a certain local matter. On that view it gives no warrant for gatherings of Christians everywhere taking up collections every Lord's Day. Yes; but are there not poor believers now as there were then?
- Last. Money comes at the end of this letter, not the start. It still comes in, and it carries instructions of lasting value.
- Same. Paul gives Corinth the order he had already given Galatia. Different places, same rule — even for something as ordinary as giving.
- Poor. The believers in Jerusalem had sold what they owned to meet each other's need. Their own generosity is part of why they were now poor.
- Fair. The gospel went out from Jerusalem to the nations. Sending material help back was only right.
- Now. The question the verse leaves is simple: are there still poor believers to care for?
On [the] first of [the] week let each of you put by at home, laying up [in] whatever [degree] he may have prospered, that there may be no collections when I come.
The apostle closes this letter with money — a relief fund for believers in Judea who had fallen into need. In a few short clauses it settles who gives, when, how much, and from what motive.
One writer draws out two habits packed into the verse: regular giving, and giving measured against income.
The apostle's last direction in this letter concerns the special collection they were making at that time for poor believers in Judea. Today in many religious circles money is so often the first topic. Here it is the last. Still it comes in, and it carries instructions of lasting value. Verse 2 urges systematic giving instead of haphazard giving. Proportionate giving is also what God expects — in proportion to the prosperity which God Himself may have given. In Jewish days God fixed the proportion at one tenth. He has not fixed any proportion for us who are under grace. But be sure of this. We shall hear something pretty serious at the judgment seat if we fall below the standard the law set.
The day is not chosen at random. It is the day Christ rose and the day the disciples met.
In due time that day was to receive its fitting name, "the Lord's day" (Revelation 1:10). It marks out the Christian as the Sabbath marked out the Jew. What set it apart was not only the gathering of the saints, but the presence of the Lord among them. So it was again at the beginning of the following week. Later the Holy Spirit marks it out as the day when believers break bread (Acts 20:7), and when the needs of the holy poor rise up in remembrance before Him and them (1 Corinthians 16:2).
Each one is to "put something aside and store it up" — a private act. Older translations render it "lay by him in store." One writer reads both sides together: each settles the amount at home, then brings it when the assembly meets.
The collection for the saints was bound up with the solemn and gracious associations of the first, or resurrection, day. It was to go on regularly, not now and then. Each was to do it with conscience, according as he might be prospered. No one was to give under influence, or pressure, or haste, still less with indifference, or on merely human grounds… It seems that each was to lay aside at home what he judged right according to the means given. But the mention of the first of the week, or Lord's day, points to their bringing their contributions together when they met, as every disciple did, to break bread.
Scripture names no sum. It names the reach — each one — and the standard: how God has prospered that person during the week.
It is well to see that the Lord has not laid down the proportion to be set aside. He has not asked you to give half of your goods to the poor, as Zacchaeus was in the habit of doing, nor a tenth as in the case of Israel. But it appears to me from the words — "every one of you" — that each, however poor, is bound to give something. How much that is you must each settle for yourselves before the Lord… Say plainly, "Here is my sixpence, Lord; it is all I can spare You this week;" and then wait to see whether conscience cries "Shame" at you or not.
The last clause guards against one danger: giving stirred up by a visiting personality rather than by conscience.
He wished to avoid a special collection during his visit. It was not only, as it seems to us, that his time could be better used than in such service. He felt it was a matter for the Christian conscience and heart, not for influence of his own, still less for rivalry, or for the gusts of some passing impulse. What a contrast to getting a popular man to come and preach a moving sermon to work on people's feelings!
The verse commands the act. It says nothing about how the money should be collected.
Scripture is totally silent on the point. It simply says, "Let every one of you lay by him in store." It does not say where or how. It says that "every one" was to do it — and to do it according as God had prospered him… Now, if the Holy Spirit has not laid down any rule about the way of collecting for the poor, why should we?
- Day — Giving belongs to the first day of the week, the day Christ rose. Believers gather, and the needs of the poor come up before God with them.
- Everyone — The reach is total: "every one of you," so that even the poorest has something to bring, and no one is a spectator.
- Measure — Grace imposes no tenth. The standard is how God has prospered you that week, and you settle it alone with Him.
- Motive — Conscience, not pressure. Paul rules out a collection timed to his own arrival. No personality, rivalry, or passing impulse should do the work.
- Method — Scripture fixes the act and leaves the method free. Where God has made no rule, we should not invent one.
And when I am arrived, whomsoever ye shall approve, these I will send with letters to carry your bounty to Jerusalem
Near the end of a letter full of correction, Paul turns to money. Churches were gathering a gift for poor believers in Jerusalem, and this verse raises two questions that never go away: who picks the men who handle church funds, and what protects both the money and their good name?
Paul does not name the messengers. He leaves that choice to the Corinthians. One writer sees here the same wisdom the apostles showed in Acts 6.
The apostle was careful to leave no room for suspicion or for the look of wrong. So here he applies afresh the apostolic wisdom we see in Acts 6. The crowd chose their own administrators. They gave the funds, and they, not the apostles, chose the men they trusted to hand them out.
So not every servant of the church is appointed the same way.
The deacons are servants, and servants of the Church... It shows us the men who did the work of deacons being chosen by the churches, with the apostles wanting it that way. And it shows us elders appointed by the apostle or by his delegates, and by no one else.
Commentators differ over whose letters these are. Some say the Corinthians wrote them to approve their own men. Others say the letters were Paul's, given to the men the Corinthians had chosen.
But the letters were to be his, not theirs, as the King James Version wrongly has it... What sense would it make for them to approve by their letters when the apostle came? The Corinthians were to select whom they approved, and Paul, on arriving, would send them on with letters from himself.
Either way, the letters did the same job. The men did not arrive among strangers as unknowns carrying other people's money.
Paul was the natural person to carry the gift himself. He refused to do it alone.
Our God is above all things a God of order. He loves to see His people careful in all their ways, and especially where money is involved... Paul was glad to have a part in this work of grace, but he insisted on having companions, men the assemblies had chosen with care for the job.
That care was not fussiness. Paul knew what he was up against.
The apostle knew the enemy's tricks, and so he guards with care against suspicion and damaging hints. Sadly, think what ruin dishonest gain, the love of money, greed, which is idolatry, has caused in the professing church, and how much offence it has given to unbelievers.
The destination was not random. The believers there were poor, and the Gentiles owed them a debt.
In that city there were many believers who had suffered persecution, and there were likely many widows and orphans... The gospel had gone out from Jerusalem to the Gentiles. Since the Gentile converts had received spiritual things, it was only right that they should share their material things. The collection was to go on steadily, each one putting money aside as God had prospered him.
Letters like these were not just for this one collection. The habit worked both ways.
The early Christians made it their practice to give letters of commendation to believers who left them for churches where nobody knew them. They also asked the same of strangers who came to them for fellowship... Such letters guard against receiving false believers. They build up confidence and fellowship between churches.
But a letter is a servant, not a master. It can be twisted into the very opposite of its purpose.
It does real harm when something God uses for our mutual comfort gets twisted by rigid rule-keeping into a tool of spiritual torture — sometimes over a missing letter of commendation, or some similar detail left undone.
- Given — the money came from the Corinthians. Each one set it aside as God had prospered him, so it was theirs to direct.
- Chosen — because they gave it, they chose who would carry it. Apostles appointed elders; the churches picked the men who handled money.
- Sealed — the carriers travelled with letters that introduced them to believers who had never met them. Commentators differ over who wrote the letters.
- Guarded — Paul refused to travel alone with the gift. He knew the enemy's tricks, and what damage the love of money has done in the church.
- Delivered — the gift went to Jerusalem, where believers were poor after persecution. The gospel had gone out from them, so the Gentiles owed them material help.
and if it be suitable that *I* also should go, they shall go with me.
Paul ends this letter with practical matters, and the first is money — a relief fund the churches gathered for believers in Jerusalem. Verse 4 settles one open question: if Paul travelled to Jerusalem himself, the men chosen by the church would still go with him.
Some read the clause to mean that the size of the gift settled whether Paul went. One commentator rejects that reading.
Many draw out the meaning, "if the occasion, or the size of the collection, warrants an apostolic mission to carry it." But that sense, though possible in grammar, seems to me unworthy — not only of the apostle, but even of the delegates. It is tolerable only because the begging habits of Christendom have lowered men... If it were suitable, then, that Paul also should go, the delegates should go with him. He would guard his services from all ground for reproach, providing for things honest, not only before the Lord, but also before men.
Paul does not name the carriers. He leaves that to the givers, and treats it as an old rule rather than a new one.
Here the apostle makes a fresh application of the wisdom we see in Acts 6. The whole company of believers chose their own administrators. They contributed the funds, and they, not the apostles, chose men in whom they had confidence to dispense them... Here, then, the apostle promises on his arrival to send with letters whomever they should approve to bring their bounty to Jerusalem.
The verse never has Paul carrying the gift alone. If he went, they went with him — and he kept that rule elsewhere too.
When money is in question, the apostles withdraw from taking that work on themselves. Later, Paul refused to handle the distribution of the offerings of the saints unless someone chosen by the churches worked alongside him. He would give no occasion, however small, for suspicion that could injure his ministry.
Such caution with money can look like weak faith.
This is not lack of faith. It is faith working by love. Such faith cuts off occasion from men, and walks with a pure conscience before God.
The shared journey was more than a safeguard. Paul wanted Corinthian hands to carry the Corinthian gift.
What the Corinthians sent must come from them, warm with their love, and handed over by their own messengers. This work needed more than a faithful discharge of trust. It needed real building up, through an exchange of brotherly kindness between the Greek and Jewish saints. He would gladly travel with their messengers, if that seemed fitting when the time came. Nothing lay closer to his heart than the pulling down of the barriers of prejudice on either side, and the practical union of those who were already one in Christ.
The believers waiting for this gift were poor for a reason. Part of it was their own earlier giving.
The believers there were very many. And there alone, so far as we read, had they sold their possessions and belongings to give to all, as anyone had need. There alone no one said that anything he owned was his own. They shared everything, so that no one was in want. But there, partly through this surprising testimony of unselfish love, poverty came later.
Paul had already told this church he took nothing from them for himself. That did not hold him back here.
Though Paul would accept nothing for himself from the Corinthians, he would still share with all his heart in their generosity toward the poor saints.
- Need — Jerusalem's believers were poor in part because they had once sold what they owned and shared it with all.
- Gift — The money was theirs, so the choice of carriers was theirs. Paul added his letters, and left the choice alone.
- Guard — He would not handle the fund alone. Faith working by love takes away any occasion for suspicion, honest before men as well as before the Lord.
- Company — If he went, they went with him. His own presence never replaced the church's messengers.
- Result — Greek hands carried a Greek gift to Jewish believers. That pulled down prejudice on both sides and showed the union of people already one in Christ.
But I will come to you when I shall have gone through Macedonia; for I do go through Macedonia.
Paul has finished his directions to the church at Corinth. Now he turns to his own travel plans. Behind this short note about Macedonia lie a changed route, a delayed visit, and a reason he held back until his second letter.
The letter itself shows where Paul was when he wrote. One commentator draws out the place, the force of his words, and what he hoped for:
It is clear from verse 8 that the apostle was in Ephesus when he wrote this first letter to Corinth. The false note added at the end of the common text says "from Philippi," but he really wrote from Ephesus... His purpose was to pass through Macedonia. That is the force of the Greek: a journey ahead of him as a settled thing, but not yet under way. He declined to see them then, hoping to stay some time with them, with the Lord's permission, instead of merely passing through.
This was not Paul's first plan. What he heard from Corinth changed it:
He maps out the round of work he planned, with his expected visit to them as the main thing in view. His original purpose was to see them before going on into Macedonia. But the news he had received from Chloe's household led him to send a letter rather than pay a passing visit... The Lord should first speak with them through his written word... by this means he works to bring their souls back to God first. Then, when he came, he could be among them as a comforter and not as one who rebukes... And we have reason to bless God for his change of mind.
Paul gives the new plan here without a reason. The reason comes later:
He had intended to visit them on the way to Macedonia, and a second time on the way back. He does not say here why he did not go there on his way to Macedonia. And he speaks with uncertainty about his stay at Corinth when he arrives there on his return... The second epistle will explain all this. In the state they were in, his heart would not allow him to visit them. But he treats them tenderly all the same, as still beloved Christians.
Some at Corinth took the delay as proof that Paul was unreliable. The real reason was the opposite:
He tells them that it was to spare them that he had not come to Corinth. This ought to have been a reproof, and he gives it in the most gentle way. It was the sweet result of divine love in his heart. He preferred to stay away or go elsewhere, instead of visiting the Corinthians in their present condition. Had he come at all, he must have come with a rod, and this he could not bear... He loved the Corinthians deeply, despite all their faults. They hinted unfairly that he had a fickle mind, because he did not visit them at once. He would rather bear that than come to blame them in their evil and proud state. He wished to give them time, so that he might come with joy.
Two verses later Paul adds a condition over the whole journey: "if the Lord permits." One writer takes that as the pattern for all Christian planning:
Paul mentions the important principle of all biblical planning: "if the Lord permits." Some at Corinth criticised him for not coming as planned, and in 2 Corinthians he had to explain why... We all have to make plans — in our daily lives as well as in the service of the Lord. The apostle also had plans and ideas about what he wanted to do. But we can learn a vital lesson from him: he was always dependent on the guidance of his Lord. He was sensitive to see when the Lord clearly wanted to change his plans and guide him in another direction.
But the condition has to be the right one. One writer shows how easy it is to pick the wrong one:
Suppose I say, "If the Lord delays His coming, I mean to go to London next week." I have made my trip to London depend on His delay. But He may delay, and still it may not be His will that I go at all. So I ought to place all my movements, all my actions, all my plans, under the commanding influence of my Lord's will.
- Place. Paul wrote from Ephesus. The journey through Macedonia was settled, but not yet begun.
- Pause. He had meant to visit Corinth first. News of their condition made him send a letter instead — and we have reason to bless God for the change.
- Purpose. The delay was love, not fickleness. A visit then would have meant a rod, so he gave them time and could come with joy.
- Postponed reason. He keeps his reason to himself here. The second letter explains it. This one still treats them as beloved Christians.
- Permission. "If the Lord permits" is the governing clause. Put every plan, in daily life and in service, under the commanding influence of the Lord's will.
But perhaps I will stay with you, or even winter with you, that *ye* may set me forward wheresoever I may go.
Paul closes a long letter of correction with his travel plans. He hopes to stay at Corinth, maybe the whole winter, and then be sent on his way. Two questions sit inside that plain-sounding schedule. Why was he not coming sooner? And what was he asking them to do for him?
Where was Paul when he wrote? And what did he hope for at Corinth? One commentator reads both out of the closing verses.
It is clear from verse 8 that the apostle was in Ephesus when he wrote this first letter to Corinth… He might perhaps then stay with them, or even spend the winter. He adds a word of loving confidence that they might send him on wherever he might go. He declined to see them at that time, for reasons explained in 2 Corinthians 1. He hoped instead to remain with them for a while, if the Lord allowed it, rather than just passing through.
The delay was deliberate. One writer traces the change of plan and the reason behind it.
His original purpose was to see them before he passed into Macedonia. But the report that reached him from Chloe's household led him to prefer a letter to a passing visit. Left to himself, that news might have made him hurry the visit rather than delay it. Under the sure guidance of the Spirit, though, he deals more wisely with their state. The Lord should first speak with them through his written word. He knew that what he wrote carried the weight and authority of a divine command. So he works by this means to bring their souls back to God first. Then, when he came, he might be among them not as a reprover but as a comforter. In the fellowship of the gospel they should strengthen him also, and help him on his way. But he puts off his visit, so that the effect of his letter may be seen first. And we have reason to bless God for his change of mind.
Staying away was not the same as giving up on them.
He speaks with uncertainty about his stay at Corinth when he would arrive there on his return from Macedonia. If the Lord permitted, he would stay a while with them. In their present state his heart would not allow him to visit them. But he treats them tenderly all the same, as still beloved Christians, giving them directions suited to the circumstances of the moment.
The phrase is not a polite farewell. Other letters use it too, and one writer shows what it cost.
It is right to support those who have gone out for "His Name's sake" and to help them on their way. Paul expressed his confidence in the believers at Rome that they would bring him on his way to Spain (Rom. 15:24. See also 1 Cor. 16:6; 2 Cor. 1:16 and Titus 3:13). The phrase "bring forward on their journey" suggests that the saints would meet the financial needs of the Lord's servants.
So Corinth, for all its problems, is still asked to send a servant on to the next place.
Paul names the visit but not where he goes next. One writer shows how a plan can sound godly and still rest on the wrong condition.
Suppose I say, "If the Lord delays, I mean to go to London next week." That makes my going to London depend on the Lord's delay. But He may delay, and it may still not be His will for me to go at all. So I ought to place all my movements, all my actions, all my plans, under the commanding influence of my Lord's will.
Did the winter at Corinth happen? One writer points to the record in Acts.
Acts 20:1-3 records the fulfilment of verses 5 and 6. The three months he remained in Greece were evidently the winter. From there he returned by way of Macedonia on the road to Jerusalem… He did not promise to come to Corinth soon. But when he did come, he wanted to stay for a time.
- Plan — Paul wrote from Ephesus. He meant to reach Corinth through Macedonia and stay, maybe the whole winter, instead of passing through.
- Pause — He held back on purpose. The letter would do its work first, so he could arrive as a comforter, not a reprover.
- Purpose — "Help me on my journey" makes a local church a partner in work beyond its own city. It receives a servant, then sends him on.
- Provision — Elsewhere in the New Testament the same phrase costs money. It means meeting the needs of those who go out for the Name.
- Permission — The destination stays open: "wherever I go." Every plan waits on the Lord's will. And the winter at Corinth did come, as Acts 20 records.
For I will not see you now in passing, for I hope to remain a certain time with you, if the Lord permit.
Paul drops his plan for a quick stop at Corinth and hopes for a longer stay instead, if the Lord permits. That short sentence holds a change of route, a reason he kept back, and a rule for making plans.
Paul had first meant to call at Corinth on his way to Macedonia. Here he cancels that, and later has to defend himself for it:
Paul says it was not lightness, and it was not uncertainty. It was to spare them that he had not yet come to Corinth. He wrote to them instead of going. He says, "not yes and no," not changing, not the lightness of a foolish human mind. In 1 Corinthians 16:5 he says, "I will come to you when I pass through Macedonia." In verse 7 he adds, "For I do not want to see you now just in passing." But he did not tell them why just then. He had intended to go by Corinth into Macedonia, and come back again by them, but he says, I will not do that now.
He gives them the fact of the delay without the explanation. That silence was deliberate:
When he wrote about the collection, the Apostle had spoken of visiting the Corinthian assembly. He now refers again to this proposed visit, and tells them that for the present he was postponing it. With great grace and wisdom he does not tell them the reason. In the second chapter of his second letter, he has seen the effect of this first letter in their repentance. Then he is free to tell them in detail why he could not come to them.
He could have gone at once. Instead his letter goes first, so that his arrival can be a different kind of visit:
Left to himself, he might have hurried his visit for this reason instead of delaying it. But the sure guidance of the Spirit leads him to handle their state more wisely. The Lord should first speak with them through his written word. He knew that what he wrote carried the weight and authority of a divine command. He uses it to bring their souls back to God first. Then, when he came, he could be among them as one who comforts, not one who rebukes... And we have reason to bless God for his change of mind.
He wanted more than a stop on the way:
He might then stay with them, or even spend the winter there. He adds a loving word of confidence that they would send him on his way wherever he went. He chose not to see them at that time, for reasons he explains in 2 Corinthians 1. He hoped to stay with them for a while, if the Lord allowed it, instead of just passing through.
The closing clause is not a throwaway phrase. It marks the line Paul drew between what he was sure of and what he was not:
The apostle does not always feel free to speak with certainty about his plans. In those cases he says, "I hope," or "If the Lord will," or something similar. (1 Cor. 16:7; Phil. 2:19; Philemon 22.)
Making that clause our own means more than adding words to a sentence. It hands over the whole schedule:
Suppose I say, "If the Lord delays His coming, I mean to go to London next week." Then my going to London depends on the Lord's delay. But He may delay, and it may still not be His will that I should go at all. So I ought to place all my movements, all my actions, all my plans, under the commanding influence of my Lord's will.
- Plan. Paul made real plans and named real places. The problem was never planning, but planning as if the outcome were his to guarantee.
- Pause. He dropped the passing visit and held back his reason, telling them only later, once his letter had done its work.
- Letter. His letter went first, so that his coming could comfort them rather than rebuke them.
- Time. He wanted a stay with real time in it, even a winter, not a call made on the way to somewhere else.
- Permission. Where he could not speak with certainty, he said "if the Lord will." Every movement, action and plan of ours belongs under that same clause.
But I remain in Ephesus until Pentecost.
Paul ends this letter with his travel plans, and this one line tells us where he was as he wrote: Ephesus. It raises a question — why stay there when Corinth was waiting, and why "until Pentecost"?
Some older printed Bibles carry a note at the end of this letter saying it was written from Philippi. This verse settles the matter otherwise, and the greetings later in the chapter agree.
It is clear from verse 8 that the apostle was in Ephesus when he wrote this first letter to Corinth. The false note at the end of the usual printed text, which the Authorised Version follows, says "from Philippi." But the letter really came from Ephesus, as the Vatican manuscript and some other copies show. That is also why the greetings come from "the assemblies of Asia."
Pentecost fell fifty days after Passover, so naming it dates the letter as well as placing it.
The statement at the close of the letter, printed in some editions of the Bible as "written from Philippi," is incorrect. In chapter 16:8 we read the writer's statement, "But I will stay in Ephesus until Pentecost." The apostle Paul was therefore in Ephesus and intended to leave about Pentecost. The book of Acts shows that he left that city about the time of Pentecost in the year 57.
The reason he gives for staying is the open door — not the absence of trouble. Both facts sat side by side, and only one of them decided his movements.
He tells them why he stayed at Ephesus, the city from which he is writing; for there a great door was opened to him that was effective in blessing, and there were many adversaries. If the Lord opens a door, the devil will surely stir up many adversaries; the apostle's movements were not governed by the adversaries, but by the Lord who kept the door open.
Many people read hostility as a sign that they are in the wrong place. This verse teaches the opposite reading, and the difference is worth learning before the pressure comes.
We have in verse 8 an important principle about work. There are many adversaries, but a great and effective door is opened to me, and so I will stay. It is a very different thing to have the door closed and to have many adversaries. We shall soon find out when the door is closed. I think it needs patience; and you may find amazing opposition. At one place everything was against me. I remember only two people coming, for eight weeks. But at the end of that time forty or fifty came in, and several were converted. At another place, where all was for me, even the clergyman, it all came to nothing.
Ephesus was famous for the temple of the goddess Diana, and the weeks before Pentecost were her festival season, when crowds poured into the city from across the province.
"About the time of the Passover," writes Lewin, "began the Artemisius, or the month of Diana, so called from the yearly festival of the goddess held at that time throughout Greece and Asia." … This month of games and feasting may help explain the apostle's words to the Corinthians, "I will stay in Ephesus until Pentecost; for a wide door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many adversaries." Was he expecting special opportunities for the gospel throughout that festival month, the end of which would not be long before the time of the feast of Pentecost?
Stuart raises this as a question, not a settled fact.
He stayed in one city, but the effect did not stay there. Others carried the word out from Ephesus into places he never visited.
He speaks of a great door opened to him, effective in the blessing of many souls. Acts 19:10-20 gives the history of it: the word of God grew mightily and prevailed. Paul himself stayed in Ephesus. Yet from there the word went through all Asia Minor (Acts 19:10), no doubt carried by others. Colossae and Laodicea were not far from Ephesus. Yet the believers there had never seen Paul's face.
- Door — He stayed because a door for real work stood open. The door decided, not the conditions.
- Adversaries — Trouble comes because the door is open. A shut door and a hard fight are not the same thing.
- Patience — Weeks with almost no one may come before real fruit. An easy welcome can come to nothing.
- Timing — "Until Pentecost" fixes the letter to one season and place. It may also mark a rare opening during the festival month.
- Reach — He stayed in one city, and the word travelled across Asia Minor. It reached believers who never saw his face.
For a great door is opened to me and an effectual [one], and [the] adversaries many.
Paul writes from Ephesus and explains why he will not leave yet. His reason sounds strange at first: an open door and a crowd of enemies, both offered as grounds for staying.
The verse answers a practical question: where should a servant of Christ be? Paul points to what the Lord was doing in that city.
Verse 8 makes clear that the apostle was in Ephesus when he wrote this first letter to Corinth… He would stay at Ephesus, where he then was, until Pentecost. That the Lord was working there was reason enough, and no less so because there were many adversaries. He trusted to carry on the work, and help souls against Satan.
A "door" here is not a place but a chance to work. The servant does not open it for himself.
It is a "door" of service and testimony that is opened or closed according to Christ's sovereign pleasure… The treasures of grace and blessing are under the absolute control of Christ. "He has the key," and He will not pass it on to another. So when He opens or closes a door, who can shut or open? His right to direct His servants is unquestionable, His authority irresistible.
The door was not just wide; it was working. Acts records what came of it, and how far it reached.
He speaks of a great door being opened to him, effective in the blessing of many souls. Acts 19:10-20 records the history of this: the Word of God grew powerfully and prevailed. Paul himself stayed in Ephesus, yet from there the Word went through all Asia Minor (Acts 19:10), no doubt carried by others. Colossae and Laodicea were not far from Ephesus, yet the saints in those places had not seen Paul's face (Col. 1:2).
Everything turns on one small word. Paul joins the door and the enemies with "and".
He does not say, "but there are many adversaries," as if this might excuse him from keeping on with the work. He simply says, "and there are many adversaries." So it was all the more important to have his whole heart in the service of God.
The two halves of the verse belong together. One writer names who stirs up the opposition, and who set Paul's course.
He tells them why he stayed at Ephesus, the city he is writing from. There a great door was opened to him that was effective in blessing, and there were many adversaries. If the Lord opens a door, the devil is sure to stir up many adversaries. Yet the adversaries did not govern the apostle's movements; the Lord who kept the door open did.
So how do you know when opposition means it is time to leave?
There are many adversaries, but a great and effective door is opened to me, and so I will stay. It is a very different thing to have the door closed, and to have many adversaries. We will soon find out when the door is closed. I think it needs patience, and you may find amazing opposition. I remember one place where everything was against me: for eight weeks only two people came. But at the end of that time forty or fifty came in, and several were converted. At another place, where all was for me, even the clergyman, it all came to nothing.
The same fact can produce the opposite conclusion. Long before Paul, God's people treated their enemies as a reason to stop.
God had stirred up the spirit of His people to rebuild His house. Now they claimed it was not the right time for their work. And what led them to this conclusion? The fact that there were adversaries, that the times were not peaceful. As if enemies to the Lord's work would ever cease! As if the time would ever come when the natural eye would see the opportunity for work for the Lord! We all have to learn the lesson that the Word — the mind of the Lord — is the warrant for service. When He speaks, we are simply to go forward, whatever the circumstances and however many the adversaries. Their spirit is a complete contrast to that of the apostle, who said, "a wide door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many adversaries."
- Opened. The door is an opportunity for service. Christ alone holds the key — He opens and closes at His pleasure, and hands that key to no one.
- Effective. The door was not just wide. It worked: souls blessed, the Word spreading from Ephesus through all Asia to towns Paul never visited.
- And. Paul writes "and there are many adversaries," not "but" — the enemies stand beside the opportunity, never as an excuse to quit.
- Governed. The Lord who kept the door open set his course, not the enemies who wanted it shut.
- Discern. A shut door and a hard door are not the same thing. You will soon know which one you face. The mind of the Lord — not the number of enemies — is your warrant to serve.
Now if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you without fear; for he works the work of the Lord, even as I.
Paul is sending a young helper to Corinth in his place. Near the end of his letter he tells this proud, divided church how to treat him. The order is short, but it lays a duty on a whole church. They are responsible for how a servant of Christ feels among them.
Paul had decided not to visit Corinth himself. The state of the church there was the reason. He sent Timothy into a situation that would have tested anyone.
Paul would not go to Corinth because of their low spiritual condition. If he had gone, he would have had to use divine discipline. Instead, Paul sent Timothy to them. Timothy was Paul's dear and faithful child in the Lord, his companion and fellow worker. So he could remind the Corinthians of Paul's ways and teaching. How different those ways were from much that the Corinthians saw and taught in their own assembly! This was not an easy task. There were those there who strongly opposed Paul.
Timothy had already been travelling for Paul. Corinth lay further along the same road.
In Acts 19:22 we see that he had sent Timothy into Macedonia. In this letter he thinks Timothy might go on as far as Corinth. If he came, the Corinthians were to receive him as they would have received Paul.
The charge falls on the church, not on the servant. Paul does not tell Timothy to be brave. He tells them to make sure nothing in their welcome frightens him.
But his heart could not rest without commending Timothy, and the more as he was timid. He wants him to be free from fear among them. He even lowers himself to put Timothy on common ground with himself, as a workman of the Lord. He is anxious that no one should despise him. That danger is real among the saints: self-seeking men can fool them just as easily as they can slight true servants of Christ.
Commentators differ on whose fear the verse means. Most read it as Timothy's own. One writer reads it the other way round.
He commends Timothy to them. They need not have any fear about him.
The pressure came from the mood of the church itself. A confident church can make little of a man who does not match its confidence.
In chapter 4:17 Paul had spoken of sending Timothy to Corinth. Now he urges them not to intimidate the young man in any way. Timothy was clearly timid by nature. Even so, Paul does not hesitate to commend him as a true servant of God, and he is glad to link Timothy's work for the Lord with his own. The Corinthians were self-confident, and they would tend to look down on a man who did not share that confidence. Some in Corinth had treated Paul himself that way, and this fleshly spirit would likely take even more advantage of the younger man.
Paul's reason is Timothy's work, and the spirit in which he does it.
Timothy plainly had a timid nature. So they were to be careful to act in a way that left him free from fear among them. He was also young, but they were not to despise him for that. Could there be a greater commendation? He not only did the work of the Lord; he did it in the same spirit as the Apostle. He lived out the appeal Paul had already made to the Corinthian assembly: "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ."
Paul leaves the visit itself in the Lord's hands, and hands Timothy's youth and nerves to the church to care for. (Older translations read "if Timothy comes," and these writers work from that wording.)
The uncertainty here about his arrival is no more than what Paul says in the previous verse about the length of his own planned visit. The Lord might or might not have allowed Timothy to come. Paul commends his youth and natural timidity to their sympathy. At the same time he makes a large claim on his behalf: the whole Church owes him obedience. As the apostle's chosen fellow worker, he would bring full authority with him. Paul also trusted that Timothy, as an example of true godliness, would bring no disgrace on the place he held.
- Sent — Paul stayed away from Corinth. Their condition would have forced him to use discipline. So he sent Timothy in his place, and the church was to welcome him as they would welcome Paul.
- Feared — Timothy was young and timid by nature. The confident spirit at Corinth would look down on a man who did not share it.
- Charged — the command falls on the church, not the servant: they are to see to it that he is among them without fear.
- Commended — Paul's ground is Timothy's work. He lowers himself to place his young companion on the same footing as himself, as a workman of the Lord.
- Warned — a church can slight a true servant of Christ as quickly as it falls for a self-seeking one.
Let not therefore any one despise him; but set him forward in peace, that he may come to me; for I expect him with the brethren.
This verse reads like a travel note. In fact Paul is shielding a young worker from a church that had already treated Paul himself with contempt. So two questions sit behind it. What makes a servant worth respecting? And what does that respect look like in practice?
Timothy was not bold by nature. The church he was heading toward was full of confidence in itself. Grant ties the warning to that mismatch, and fills in where Timothy was travelling.
In chapter 4:17 Paul had spoken of sending Timothy to Corinth. Now he urges them not to intimidate the young man in any way. Timothy was clearly of a timid nature. Even so, Paul does not hesitate to commend him as a true servant of God, and he is glad to link Timothy's work for the Lord with his own. The self-confidence of the Corinthians would no doubt tend to belittle a man who did not show that same self-confidence. Acts 19:22 gives the history of Paul sending Timothy (and Erastus) to Macedonia, apparently on their way to Corinth. The visit was not meant to be a long one, for Paul looked for Timothy to meet him afterward.
The danger was not imaginary. Some at Corinth had already looked down on Paul himself:
Some at Corinth held Paul in contempt because his "bodily presence" was "weak." He did not have an impressive "outward appearance" (see 1 Sam. 16:7; 2 Cor. 10:7), and even the disciples at Corinth were drawn away from him.
Paul does not defend Timothy by his age. He points to the work Timothy does and the spirit he does it in.
He was also young, but that was no reason to despise him. Could there be higher praise than this? He not only did the work of the Lord; he did it in the same spirit as the Apostle. He was carrying out the call already given to the church at Corinth: "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ" (1 Cor. 11:1).
Kelly sees a double danger in the way believers weigh up those who serve them.
But his heart could not rest without commending Timothy, all the more because Timothy was timid. Paul wanted him to be among them without fear. He is anxious that no one should despise him. This is a danger among believers, who are as ready to be deceived by self-seeking men as they are to slight true servants of Christ.
The verse asks for more than holding back contempt. It calls for something active.
So no one was to despise him. His youth might well have tempted them to do just that. Instead they were to help him on his way in peace, so that he could go to the apostle who was waiting for him. That waiting was one more proof of the apostle's esteem for a man who lived up to his name as one who honored God.
Pridham points to the letter itself as Timothy's protection. He also leaves one detail open.
They must not, then, despise his younger representative. That warning was far from needless, for some at Corinth had looked on Paul's own presence among them with contempt. By the power of his letter, however, he will secure a worthy welcome for his fellow worker. Which of his other fellow workers are in view here is uncertain.
One writer turns the warning on older believers and how they treat the young.
Dear older believers, an old man of long and wide experience is speaking to you. Do not discourage young men. Do not snub the Josiahs of twenty years old… Yes, young men can be pushy and troublesome in the churches; but so can men who are far from young… Young men should never despise the counsel of the aged, and the aged should never discourage the zeal of the young.
But youth on its own is not a qualification. Another writer sets the limit:
The call of God and the gift of Christ can rest on a young man like Timothy… and "Let no one despise you for your youth" would apply to any such man today, just as it did to Timothy long ago. But it was to Timothy that the words quoted, "he must not be a recent convert," were addressed. His youth was no encouragement for others to act when they had neither the gift nor the grace God had given him.
- Fear first. Timothy was young and timid. Paul feared that a self-confident church would look down on a servant who did not match its manner.
- Work, not age. The reason no one may look down on him is the work he does and the spirit he does it in — the same work, in the same spirit, as Paul.
- A real danger. Believers can fall for men who push themselves forward, and slight Christ's true servants at the same time.
- Peace, not just silence. Not despising is only half of it. They must help him on his way, and send him off in peace.
- Expected. Paul is waiting for him. That is one more mark of his esteem for a man whose name means honouring God.
Now concerning the brother Apollos, I begged him much that he would go to you with the brethren; but it was not at all [his] will to go now; but he will come when he shall have good opportunity.
Paul ends this letter with travel plans and news of his fellow workers. Here he reports something that did not go his way. He urged Apollos to visit Corinth, and Apollos would not go. The verse raises a question that still matters — who has the right to tell a servant of the Lord where to go?
Corinth was split into rival groups, and Paul still wanted Apollos there. Commentators link the refusal to those groups.
Paul had begged Apollos to go to them. Apollos had already been made a blessing to them, and Paul thought he might be so again. He did not fear that Apollos would displace him in the heart of the Corinthians. But Apollos shared the apostle's feeling. He did not want to acknowledge, or by being there to seem to support, the thing that was keeping Paul away. This was all the more true because some in the assembly at Corinth wanted to use his name as the banner of a party. He was free in his movements, so he would act on the judgment the Lord gave him.
The verse does not say why Apollos refused. Writers point to work elsewhere, and to his confidence that a letter would do more good than a visit.
We cannot be surprised at Paul's earnest pleading, or at the firm refusal of Apollos… He knew, as well as Paul, that he too had supporters at Corinth. While that party spirit kept showing itself, he had no wish to go. He would expect more from Paul's letter than from a visit of his own at such a time. He also had other work in hand that he judged more urgent than what Paul proposed… Paul could direct Timothy, who was under him as his son in the faith. Apollos, called by God in his own right, answered to the Lord alone. At the right time he would not be missing from his place.
Apollos is not saying no to Corinth. He is saying not now.
Paul wrote the refusal down. He could have left it out of the letter.
Paul thought it was wise, but each servant was free, and could only act as the Lord guided him. It was not at all clear to Apollos that the Lord was calling him to go. Paul records what happened to teach believers this truth: in his ministry the servant gets his orders from the Lord, and his supplies too. This great apostle could not direct Apollos to go here or there. I think a smaller man than Paul would have kept that fact back. We do not usually publish our failures.
Commentators see the Lord's own hand in this, and read it as a pattern left on record.
We see how the Lord keeps His workers free, and also draws out grace in them, even when apostles were on the scene. He put it on record to guide us now that there are none. Nothing could be happier than this picture: love and respect with no jealousy, yet each man free before the Lord, among servants as different as an apostle, his young companion, and a fairly independent worker like Apollos.
Paul held the highest place in that work, and he still did not overrule Apollos.
There is no sign of hurt feeling that Apollos did not give in to his earnest wish. As the apostle to the Gentiles, he might have insisted that Apollos bow to his wish. Instead, he admits that Apollos had a will of his own in the matter, and that Apollos answered to the Lord, not to Paul, for his movements in His service. Here we learn a lesson: one servant of the Lord should not force his will on another servant, but should leave each one to act before the Lord. Indeed, he wrote to the Roman saints, "Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls" (Rom. 14:4).
The same principle steadies the worker who feels pressure from friends:
Do not turn aside or stop the work of the Lord because of the sneer, lack of approval, or criticism of others, even Christian friends. Take the good of their advice, by all means, but remember seriously that you have one master, Christ, and you answer to Him alone as a servant. Not even the Apostle Paul could control the movements of another of the Lord's servants.
- Asked — Paul urged Apollos to go to Corinth. He expected him to be a blessing again, and had no fear of losing his own place in their hearts.
- Declined — Apollos held back. A party was using his name, other work was more urgent, and he expected Paul's letter to do more than a visit.
- Free — Paul could direct Timothy, his son in the faith. Apollos was called by God in his own right, and answered to the Lord alone.
- Recorded — Paul published the refusal instead of hiding it. Believers were to learn that the servant takes his orders from the Lord.
- Deferred — the refusal was for that moment only. At a convenient time Apollos would not be missing from his place.