Commentari biblici

In this chapter the apostle seems to answer some cavils against himself. I. He asserts his apostolical mission and authority, and gives in his success among them as a testimony to it, 1Co 9:1,2. II. He claims a right to subsist by his ministry, and defends it by several arguments from natural reason and the Mosaical law, and asserts it also to be a constitution of Christ, 1Co 9:3-14. III. He shows that he had willingly waived this privilege and power for their benefit, 1Co 9:15-18. IV. He specifies several other things, in which he had denied himself for the sake of other men's spiritual interest and salvation, 1Co 9:19-23. And, V. Concludes his argument by showing what animated him to this course, even the prospect of an incorruptible crown, 1Co 9:24-27.

The apostle had in 1 Corinthians 8:13, mentioned his willingness to deny himself if he might be the means of benefitting others. On this principle he had acted; and on this he purposed to act. The mention of this principle of action seems to have led him to a further illustration of it in his own case, and in the illustration to meet an objection that had been urged against him at Corinth; and the scope of this chapter seems to have been not only to give an "illustration" of this principle (see 1 Corinthians 9:27), but to show that this principle on which he acted would account for his conduct when with them, and would meet all the objections which had been made against his apostleship. These objections seem to have been:

(1) That he had not seen Jesus Christ; and therefore could not be an apostle; 1 Corinthians 9:1.

(2) that he did not live like the other apostles, that he was unmarried, was a solitary man, and a wanderer, and was unlike the other apostles in his mode of life, not indulging as apostles might do in the ordinary comforts of life; 1 Corinthians 9:4-5.

(3) that he and Barnabas were compelled to labor for their support, and were conscious, therefore, that they had no pretensions to the apostolic office; 1 Corinthians 9:6. And,

(4) That the fact that he was unsupplied; that he did not apply to Christians for his maintenance; that he did not urge this as a right, showed that he was conscious that he had no claims to the apostolic character and rank.

To all this he replies in this chapter, and the main drift and design of his reply is, to show that he acted on the principle suggested in 1 Corinthians 8:13, that of denying himself; and consequently, that though he had a right to maintenance, yet that the fact that he did not urge that right was no proof that he was not sent from God, but was rather a proof of his being actuated by the high and truly principles which ought to influence those who were called to this office. In urging this reply, he shows:

(1) That he had seen Jesus Christ, and had this qualification for the office of an apostle; 1 Corinthians 9:1.

(2) that he had the power like others to partake of the common enjoyments of life, and that his "not" doing it was no proof that he was not an apostle; 1 Corinthians 9:4.

(3) that he was not prohibited from entering the domestic relations as others had done, but had the right to enjoy the same privileges if he chose; and that his not doing it was no proof that he was not an apostle, but was an instance of his denying himself for the good of others; 1 Corinthians 9:5.

(4) that he was not under a necessity of laboring with his own hands, but that he might have required support as others did; that his laboring was only another instance of his readiness to deny himself to promote the welfare of others; 1 Corinthians 9:6.

This sentiment he illustrates through the remainder of the chapter by showing that he had a right to support in the work of the apostleship, and that his not insisting on it was an instance of his being willing to deny himself that he might do good to others; that he did not urge this right because to do that might injure the cause 1 Corinthians 9:19, 1 Corinthians 9:15; and that whether he received support or not, he was bound to preach the gospel. In this he shows:

(a) 1 Corinthians 9:7-10, 1 Corinthians 9:13 That God gave him the right to support if he chose to exercise it;

(b) That it was equitable that he should be supported 1 Corinthians 9:11;

(c) That the Lord had ordained this as a general law, that they which preached the gospel should live by it 1 Corinthians 9:14;

(d) That he had not chosen to avail himself of it because it might do injury 1 Corinthians 9:12, 1 Corinthians 9:15;

(e) That necessity was laid upon him at all events to preach the gospel 1 Corinthians 9:16;

(f) That if he did this without an earthly reward, he would be rewarded in heaven in a distinguished manner 1 Corinthians 9:17-18;

(g) That he had made it the grand principle of his life, not to make money, but to save souls, and that he had sought this by a course of continued self-denial 1 Corinthians 9:19-22;

(h) That all this was done for the sake of the gospel 1 Corinthians 9:23; and,

(i) That he had a grand and glorious object in view, which required him, after the manner of the athlete, to keep his body under, to practice self-denial, to be temperate, to forego many comforts of which he might otherwise have partaken, and that the grandeur and glory of this object was enough to justify all his self-denial, and to make all his sacrifices pleasant; 1 Corinthians 9:24-27.

Thus, the whole chapter is an incidental discussion of the subject of his apostleship, in illustration of the sentiment advanced in 1 Corinthians 8:13, that he was willing to practice self-denial for the good of others; and is one of the most elevated, heavenly, and beautiful discussions in the New Testament, and contains one of the most ennobling descriptions of the virtue of self-denial, and of the principles which should actuate the Christian ministry, anywhere to be found. All classic writings would be searched in vain, and all records of profane history, for an instance of such pure and elevated principle as is presented in this chapter.

St. Paul vindicates his apostleship, and shows that he has equal rights and privileges with Peter and the brethren of our Lord; and that he is not bound, while doing the work of an apostle, to labor with his hands for his own support, 1 Corinthians 9:1-6. He who labors should live by the fruit of his own industry, 1 Corinthians 9:7. For the law will not allow even the ox to be muzzled which treads out the corn, 1 Corinthians 9:8-10. Those who minister in spiritual things have a right to a secular support for their work, 1 Corinthians 9:11-14. He shows the disinterested manner in which he has preached the Gospel, 1 Corinthians 9:15-18. Now he accommodated himself to the prejudices of men, in order to bring about their salvation, 1 Corinthians 9:19-23. The way to heaven compared to a race, 1 Corinthians 9:24. The qualifications of those who may expect success in the games celebrated at Corinth, and what that success implies, 1 Corinthians 9:25. The apostle applies these things spiritually to himself; and states the necessity of keeping his body in subjection, lest, after having proclaimed salvation to others, he should become a castaway, 1 Corinthians 9:26, 1 Corinthians 9:27.

INTRODUCTION TO 1 Corinthians 9

The principal things in this chapter are the proof of the apostle's office and authority; arguments for his own maintenance, and the maintenance of Gospel ministers; reasons why he did not make use of his right and privilege in this respect: and the whole is concluded with an exhortation to diligence and perseverance in the Christian course of life, of which he himself was an example. He begins with his office, as an apostle, and proves it; partly by his independency on men, not having his call and mission from them; and partly by his corporeal sight of Christ, and the authority which he in person received from him; and also by the success of his ministry among the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 9:1, wherefore, whatever might be objected to him by other persons, they had no reason to object to his apostleship, seeing they, being converted under his ministry, were so many seals of it, 1 Corinthians 9:2, and since his call to the ministry was firm and valid, he had a right, as other ministers, to a maintenance of himself and family, should he have any, from the churches, without labouring with his own hands, 1 Corinthians 9:3, which he proves from the law of nature and nations, exemplified in the cases of soldiers, planters of vineyards, and keepers of flocks, who by virtue of their calling and service have a right to a livelihood, between whom, and ministers of the Gospel, there is some resemblance, 1 Corinthians 9:7, and also from the law of Moses, particularly the law respecting the ox, which was not to be muzzled when it tread out the corn; and which he observes is to be understood, not only and barely in the letter of oxen, but of ministers of the word, who are as husbandmen that plough and thresh in hope, and therefore should be partakers of their hope, 1 Corinthians 9:8. Moreover, the apostle argues the right of the maintenance of the ministers of the Gospel, from the justice and equity of the thing, that seeing they minister spiritual things, it is but reasonable that they should receive temporal ones, 1 Corinthians 9:11, and which the apostle argues for himself, and Barnabas, as from the instances of other apostles, 1 Corinthians 9:5, so from the examples of those that succeeded him in Corinth, who were maintained by that church; though he did not think fit, when among them, to claim his right, and make use of his power, lest any check should be put to the progress of the Gospel, 1 Corinthians 9:12. And he goes on to make this point clear and manifest from the case of, the priests and Levites under the former dispensation, who ministering in holy things, had a provision made for them, 1 Corinthians 9:13. And lastly, from the constitution and appointment of Christ himself, who has ordained it as a law of his, that the preachers of the Gospel should live of it, 1 Corinthians 9:14, though the apostle himself did not make use of this his privilege; nor would he ever make use of it, especially at Corinth, for which he gives his reasons; and his principal one was, that his glorying might not be made void, 1 Corinthians 9:15 which did not lie in preaching the Gospel, for that he was obliged to do, 1 Corinthians 9:16, for if he had engaged in it of his own accord, he would have had his reward; but since it was through necessity, he could not claim any, 1 Corinthians 9:17, or if any, it could be no other than to preach the Gospel "gratis", and without charge, which was the thing he gloried in, 1 Corinthians 9:18, and thus, though he lived independent of men, both with respect to his office and his maintenance, yet in order to gain souls to Christ, and be the instrument of their salvation, he became a servant to all, 1 Corinthians 9:19, who are distributed into three sorts, the Jews that were under the law, 1 Corinthians 9:20, the Gentiles that were without the law, 1 Corinthians 9:21, and weak Christians, 1 Corinthians 9:22, all which he did, not with any lucrative view to himself, but for the sake of the Gospel, that he might partake of that, and of the glory he was called unto by it, 1 Corinthians 9:23 which, and not temporal things, he was looking unto, and pressing after; and which he illustrates by a metaphor taken from the Grecian games, well known to the Corinthians, particularly that of running races, in which all ran, but one only had the prize: wherefore he exhorts the Corinthians to run in like manner, that they may obtain the prize which he mentions, and describes as an incorruptible crown, in opposition to a corruptible one, which others strove for, 1 Corinthians 9:24, and to this he animates by his own example and conduct, which he expresses in terms borrowed from racers and wrestlers, expressive of his humility, sobriety, and temperance; which things he exercised, that whilst he was a preacher to others, he might not be worthy of reproof and disapprobation himself, 1 Corinthians 9:26.

IX.

The assertion in the last verse of 1 Corinthians 8 of his willingness to sacrifice for ever his own right to eat meat, about which he had himself no conscientious scruple, out of a tender regard to the spiritual welfare of others, seems to have reminded the Apostle that another act of self-sacrifice on his part had not only been unappreciated, but made the grounds of an unworthy attempt on the part of some (probably the Jewish Christians) to depreciate and even call in question his apostolic dignity and authority. At Corinth (Acts 18:3), and elsewhere (Acts 20:34, and 1Thessalonians 3:7; 1Thessalonians 3:9), the Apostle, instead of depending upon the Church for support, had laboured as a tent-maker. Cilicium, a kind of cloth used for tent-coverings, took its name from Cilicia, where the goats out of whose hair it was made were found in abundance; and the manufacture of it was naturally the handicraft which a native of Tarsus in Cilicia would, according to general custom, have learnt in his boyhood. The followers of St. Peter, with maliciously ingenious logic, argued from this practice of St. Paul’s that his dignity and authority were thereby proved to be somewhat inferior to that of St. Peter and the Lord’s brethren, who were supported by the Christian Church. It is to this subject the Apostle now turns, and the chapter (9) is occupied with his reply to their insinuations. If we remember that so long an epistle could not have been written at a single sitting, but probably occupied many days in its composition, such change in subject and style as we have an example of in the last verse of 1 Corinthians 8 and the first verse of this chapter, will not seem so abrupt and startling as at first sight they may appear. This chapter deals with its subject in a style eminently characteristic of the Apostle. While in the earlier part the style is argumentative, with here and there flashes of sarcasm or of passionate appeal, towards the end it is full of earnest and loving pathos. The subject of the entire chapter is “The vindication of his personal conduct as an Apostle,” and this is arranged in the following order:—

I.1Corinthians 9:1-18. THE ASSERTION OF HIS RIGHTS AS AN APOSTLE, AND HIS VOLUNTARY ABNEGATION OF THEM.

-11Corinthians 9:1-3. The assertion of his apostolic dignity.

-21Corinthians 9:4-14. The assertion of his right to be supported by the Church, and that he did not avail himself of it.

This right is maintained from the following considerations:—

(a)1Corinthians 9:4-6. The fact that others and their wives are so supported.

(b)1Corinthians 9:7. An appeal to the facts of ordinary life, illustrated by the cases of a soldier, a vine-keeper, and a shepherd.

(c)1Corinthians 9:8-10. A reference to the principles of Jewish law.

(d)1Corinthians 9:11-12. The treatment of other Christian teachers.

(e)1Corinthians 9:13. The support of the Jewish priesthood.

(f)1Corinthians 9:14. The command of Christ Himself.

-31Corinthians 9:15-18. The cause and motive of the Apostle’s voluntary abnegation of this right.

II.1Corinthians 9:19-27. IN OTHER MATTERS AS WELL AS IN THIS, THE APOSTLE WAS INFLUENCED BY A REGARD FOR OTHERS.

-11Corinthians 9:19-22. The various forms which this self-sacrifice assumed for their sakes.

-21Corinthians 9:22-27. The bearing of it on himself personally.

CHAPTER 9

1 Corinthians 9:1. οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐλεύθερος; οὐκ εἰμὶ ἀπ.] So A B א, min[1373], and most of the vss[1374], with Tertullian, Origen, Ambrosiast. Aug. Pelag. Cassiodorus, Bede, Griesb. Schulz, Lachm. Tisch. Elz. inverts the order of the questions, and is defended by Pott, Rinck, Reiche, Comm. crit. I. p. 206 ff., Hofmann. But it was very natural to transfer οὐκ εἰμὶ ἀπ. to the first place as the more important point, and the one first expounded in detail by the apostle himself (1 Corinthians 9:1-3).—1 Corinthians 9:2. τῆς ἐμῆς] Lachm. Rück. Tisch. read μου τῆς, with B א, 17, 31, 46, Or. Rightly; the Recept[1375] is a more precise definition of the meaning inserted in view of 1 Corinthians 9:3. Had ΜΟΥ crept in from the ΤῸ ἜΡΓΟΝ ΜΟΥ in 1 Corinthians 9:1, it would have been put after ἈΠΟΣΤΟΛῆς.—1 Corinthians 9:6. ΤΟῦ] is wanting, it is true, in A B D* F G א, 17, 46, Isidor., and is deleted consequently by Lachm. and Rück.; but the omission was very naturally suggested by 1 Corinthians 9:4-5.—1 Corinthians 9:7. ἘΚ ΤΟῦ ΚΑΡΠΟῦ] Lachm. Rück. Tisch. read ΤῸΝ ΚΑΡΠΌΝ, with A B C* D* F G א*, 17, 46, 137, Sahid. Boern. Tol. Flor. Harl. Vulg. ms. Bede. The Recept[1376] is an alteration in accordance with what follows, made without observing the difference in meaning.—1 Corinthians 9:8. ἢ οὐχὶ καὶ κ.τ.λ[1377]] There is decisive testimony in favour of Ἢ ΚΑῚ Ὁ ΝΌΜΟς ΤΑῦΤΑ Οὐ ΛΈΓΕΙ; approved by Griesb., adopted by Lachm. Rück. Tisch. It was altered because not understood.—1 Corinthians 9:10. ἘΠʼ ἘΛΠΊΔΙ ΤΟῦ ΜΕΤΈΧΕΙΝ] So Griesb. Lachm. Scholz, Rück. Tisch., with A B C א*, 10, 17, 71, Syr[1378] utr. Erp. Copt. Sahid. Baschm. Arm. Or. Eus. Cyr. The Recept[1379] again (defended by Reiche) is: Τῆς ἙΛΠΊΔΟς ΑὐΤΟῦ ΜΕΤΈΧΕΙΝ ἘΠʼ ἘΛΠΊΔΙ. Since, however, this ἘΠʼ ἘΛΠΊΔΙ is omitted also by D* F G, 46, it has such a weight of evidence against it[1380] that it must be rejected at once; τῆς ἐλπίδος αὐτοῦ μετέχειν, again, is so plain as regards its meaning, that had it been the original reading it could hardly have given rise to any change. If, on the other hand, it was not observed that we have to supply ἈΛΟᾶΝ after ἈΛΟῶΝ, the ἘΠʼ ἘΛΠΊΔΙ ΤΟῦ ΜΕΤΈΧΕΙΝ remained unintelligible, and Τῆς ἘΛΠΊΔΟς ΑὐΤΟῦ was put in as a gloss to obviate the difficulty; then this mistaken gloss in some cases displaced the original words, in others, got mixed up with them (EIz.).—1 Corinthians 9:11. θερίσομεν] C D E F G L, min[1381] Vulg. It. Theodoret, have θερίσωμεν. So Lachm. on the margin. Tischendorf is right in receiving it into the text; grammarians took offence at the subjunctive after ΕἾ.—1 Corinthians 9:13. There is decisive evidence for reading ΠΑΡΕΔΡ. here with Lachm. Rück. Tisch. (approved also by Griesb.), and in 1 Corinthians 9:15 Οὐ ΚΈΧΡΗΜΑΙ ΟὐΔΕΝῚ Τ., with Griesb. Lachm. Scholz, Rück. Tisch.—1 Corinthians 9:15. ἼΝΑ ΤῚς ΚΕΝΏΣῌ] There is great diversity here. B D* א*, Sahid. Bashm. have ΟὐΔΕῚς ΚΕΝΏΣΕΙ (so Lachm.). A has ΟὐΔΕῚς ΜῊ ΚΕΝΏΣΕΙ (so Rück.). F G, 26, give us ΤΙς ΚΕΝΏΣΕΙ. The Recept[1382], which is specially defended by Reiche, ἵνα τὶς κενώσῃ, has only a partial support from C D*** E I K א**, the majority of the min[1383] and vss[1384], Chrys. Theodoret, Damasc. Theophyl. Oec., because most of these authorities are in favour of κενώσει, which is adopted by Tisch. But the Received reading, as well as the τις κενώσει, seems to be an attempt to amend the original—but not understood—text in B (which A only intensifies), so that we ought to read: ἢ τὸ καύχημά μου οὐδεὶς κενώσει. See the exeget. remarks on the verse.—1 Corinthians 9:16. καύχημα] D E F G א*, It.: χάρις. Not strongly enough attested; an old gloss in accordance with Luke 6:32-34. Instead of γάρ after οὐαί, Elz. has δέ, but against conclusive evidence. A false correction. There are decisive grounds for reading, with Lachm. and Tisch., εὐαγγελίσωμαι in place of the second εὐαγγελίζωμαι; the Recept[1385] is a repetition from the first.—1 Corinthians 9:18. Elz. and Scholz have ΤΟῦ ΧΡΙΣΤΟῦ after ΕὐΑΓΓΈΛ., in opposition to decisive evidence.—1 Corinthians 9:20. ΜῊ ὪΝ ΑὐΤῸς ὙΠῸ ΝΌΜΟΝ] omitted in Elz., but given by almost all the uncials and many vss[1386] and Fathers. Homoeoteleuton.—1 Corinthians 9:21. The genitives ΘΕΟῦ and ΧΡΙΣΤΟῦ (Elz. and Scholz have the datives) have decisive testimony in their favour, as ΚΕΡΔΆΝΩ ΤΟῪς ἈΝ. also has (so Lachm. Rück. Tisch.); the Recept[1387] ΚΕΡΔΉΣΩ ἈΝΌΜΟΥς was formed upon the model of 1 Corinthians 9:20.—1 Corinthians 9:22. The Ὡς before ἈΣΘ. is wanting in A B א*, Vulg. Clar. Germ. Or. Cypr. Ambrosiast. Aug. Ambr. Bede. Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. It was a mechanical addition on the plan of the preceding clauses.

The article before ΠΆΝΤΑ (Elz. Scholz) is condemned by a great preponderance of authority.—1 Corinthians 9:23. ΤΟῦΤΟ] The most and best of the uncials, with the majority of vss[1388] and Fathers, have ΠΆΝΤΑ; recommended by Griesb., adopted by Lachm. Rück. Tisch. ΤΟῦΤΟ is a gloss inserted to define the meaning more precisely; for the same reason Sahid. Arm. read ΤΑῦΤΑ ΔῈ ΠΆΝΤΑ.—1 Corinthians 9:27. ὙΠΩΠΙΆΖΩ] So Elz. Lachm. It has such a mass of weighty testimony on its side (A B C D* א, min[1389] Or. Chrys. Theodoret, Theophyl. Oec.) that the other readings, ὑποπιάζω (F G K L min[1390] Fathers) and ὑποπιέζω (D*** E, min[1391] Fathers), must be rejected even on the ground of external evidence alone, all the more that the vss[1392] castigo (Vulg.), subjicio, macero, affligo, domo, do not show clearly which reading they follow. Notwithstanding, ὑποπιάζω has been defended of late, especially by Matth. (“ΠΙΆΖΕΙΝ loco πιέζειν aliquos male habuit”), Reiche, Hofm., and adopted by Tisch. It appears to have been simply the production of ignorant and mechanical transcribers, who were familiar with ΠΙΆΖΩ or ΠΙΈΖΩ, but took offence at ὙΠΩ (with Ω).

[1373] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.

[1374] ss. vss. = versions.

[1375] ecepta Textus receptus, or lectio recepta (Elzevir).

[1376] ecepta Textus receptus, or lectio recepta (Elzevir).

[1377] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[1378] yr. Peschito Syriac

[1379] ecepta Textus receptus, or lectio recepta (Elzevir).

[1380] Reiche would attach this addition (which quite mars the sense in the Recepta) to the next verse; but there, too, especially as standing first, it would obtrude upon the antithesis something quite foreign to it and unsuitable.

[1381] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.

[1382] ecepta Textus receptus, or lectio recepta (Elzevir).

[1383] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.

[1384] ss. vss. = versions.

[1385] ecepta Textus receptus, or lectio recepta (Elzevir).

[1386] ss. vss. = versions.

[1387] ecepta Textus receptus, or lectio recepta (Elzevir).

[1388] ss. vss. = versions.

[1389] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.

[1390] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.

[1391] in. codices minusculi, manuscripts in cursive writing. Where these are individually quoted, they are marked by the usual Arabic numerals, as 33, 89.

[1392] ss. vss. = versions.

CONTENTS.

That principle of loving self-denial which Paul had just laid down for himself in respect of the single point in question (1 Corinthians 8:13), he now confirms by referring to his general demeanour, of which that one resolve was merely a particular expression, and shows, in a frank, deeply impressive, and striking elucidation, how he, notwithstanding that he was free and an apostle (1 Corinthians 9:1-3), yet refrained from pressing his well-grounded right to have himself (and a consort as well) supported by the churches (1 Corinthians 9:4-18), and adapted himself to the needs of all men (1 Corinthians 9:19-23). His readers, therefore, should be like champions at the games in striving for the everlasting crown, preparing themselves to this end through the exercise of self-control, even as he too sought, by self-renunciation, to become worthy of the prize (1 Corinthians 9:24-27). Not until chap. 10 does he come back from this digression to the special topic (of the sacrificial flesh) with which it stands connected. It is not of the nature of an apology as regards its whole plan and design, but only incidentally so in some isolated references (1 Corinthians 9:2-3; 1 Corinthians 9:5; 1 Corinthians 9:12).

1Co 9:1-27.

HE CONFIRMS HIS TEACHING AS TO NOT PUTTING A STUMBLING-BLOCK IN A BROTHER'S WAY

(1Co 8:13)

BY HIS OWN EXAMPLE IN NOT USING HIS UNDOUBTED RIGHTS AS AN APOSTLE, SO AS TO WIN MEN TO CHRIST.

1. Am I not an apostle? am I not free?--The oldest manuscripts read the order thus, "Am I not free? am I not an apostle?" He alludes to

1Co 8:9,

"this liberty of yours": If you claim it, I appeal to yourselves as the witnesses, have not I also it? "Am I not free?" If you be so, much more I. For "am I not an apostle?" so that I can claim not only Christian, but also apostolic, liberty.

have I not seen Jesus--corporeally, not in a mere vision: compare

1Co 15:8,

where the fact of the resurrection, which he wishes to prove, could only be established by an actual bodily appearance, such as was vouchsafed to Peter and the other apostles. In

Ac 9:7, 17

the contrast between "the men with him seeing no man," and "Jesus that appeared unto thee in the way," shows that Jesus actually appeared to him in going to Damascus. His vision of Christ in the temple

(Ac 22:17)

was "in a trance." To be a witness of Christ's resurrection was a leading function of an apostle

(Ac 1:22).

The best manuscripts omit "Christ."

ye my work in the Lord--Your conversion is His workmanship

(Eph 2:10)

through my instrumentality: the "seal of mine apostleship"

(1Co 9:2).