the Week of Proper 21 / Ordinary 26
Click here to join the effort!
Read the Bible
Myles Coverdale Bible
1 Corinthians 9:5
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- InternationalParallel Translations
He can bring a believing wife on his travels, can't he? The other ramrods (Pete and the Lord's brothers) do this.
Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Do we not have authority to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Have we no right to take about with us a Christian wife, like the rest of the Apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?
have we not a right to take round a sister [as] wife, as also the other apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
Don't we have the right to be accompanied by a Christian wife like the other apostles, the Lord's brothers, and Cephas?
Have we no right to take along a wife who is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?
Have we not power to lead about with us a sister, a wife, as well as the other apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Peter?
Have we not a right to take with us on our journeys a Christian sister as our wife, as the rest of the Apostles do--and the Lord's brothers and Peter?
Haue we not power to lead about a sister a wife aswel as other Apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
Have we not authority to lead about a sister, a wife, as do the rest of the apostles also, and Cephas, and the Lord's brothers?
have not we the liberty to take a christian woman with us in our travels, as well as the rest of the apostles, as the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas did?
Have we not the right to take along with us a believing wife, as do the rest of the apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas (Peter)?
Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a wife, as the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Ether have we not power to leade about a sister to wyfe as wel as other Apostles and as the brethren of the lorde and Cephas?
Do we have no right to lead about a wife that is a sister, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?
Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and [as] the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
have we not authority a sister -- a wife -- to lead about, as also the other apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
Do we not have the right to bring a believing wife with us when we travel as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Peter?
Do we not have the right to the company of a believing wife, like the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?
Have we no right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?
We each have the right to marry one of the Lord's followers and to take her along with us, just as the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Peter do.
Don't we have the right to take along with us a believing wife, as do the other emissaries, also the Lord's brothers and Kefa?
Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Or haue we not power to lead about a wife being a sister, as well as the rest of the Apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
And have we not the right to travel with a Christian wife, just as the rest of the apostles, and as the brothers of our LORD, and as Cephas?
Have we no right to take along a wife who is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Kefa?
We have the right to take a believing wife with us like the other apostles, the Lord's brothers, and Cephas,[fn] don't we?Matthew 8:14; 13:55; Mark 6:3; Luke 6:15; Galatians 1:19;">[xr]
or have we not authority a sister, a wife, to lead about with us, as the rest of the apostles, and as the brethren of our Lord, and as Kipha ?
Or have we not authority to carry about with us a sister as a wife; just as the other legates, and the brothers of our Lord, and as Cephas?
Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?
Don't we have the right to bring a believing wife with us as the other apostles and the Lord's brothers do, and as Peter does?
Do we not have the right to take a Christian wife along with us? The other missionaries do. The Lord's brothers do and Peter does.
Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Have we not a right to take round, a sister wife, - as even the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
Have we not power to carry about a woman, a sister as well as the rest of the apostles and the brethren of the Lord and Cephas?
Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
Do we not have the right to take along a sister as wife, like the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?
Haue we not power to leade about a sister a woman as well as other Apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
We have the right to bring a believing wife with us when we travel, don't we? The other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Peter all do this.
Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?
Don't I have the right to follow the example of the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Peter, by taking a Christian wife with me on my trips?
Whether we han not power to lede aboute a womman a sistir, as also othere apostlis, and britheren of the Lord, and Cefas?
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
to lead: 1 Timothy 3:2, 1 Timothy 4:3, Titus 1:6, Hebrews 13:4
a sister: 1 Corinthians 7:15, 1 Corinthians 7:39, Song of Solomon 4:9, Song of Solomon 4:10, Song of Solomon 4:12, Song of Solomon 5:1, Song of Solomon 5:2, Romans 16:1, 1 Timothy 5:2
wife: or, woman
the brethren: Matthew 12:46-50, Matthew 13:55, Mark 6:3, Luke 6:15, John 2:12, Acts 1:14, Galatians 1:19
Cephas: 1 Corinthians 1:12, Matthew 8:14, Mark 1:30, John 1:42
Reciprocal: Matthew 12:50 - and sister Matthew 19:12 - which have Mark 3:16 - Simon Mark 3:18 - James Mark 15:40 - Mary the Luke 4:38 - he Luke 8:20 - thy brethren Acts 5:4 - was it not thine Acts 14:4 - apostles Acts 14:14 - the apostles 1 Corinthians 7:7 - I would 1 Corinthians 15:5 - Cephas 1 Timothy 5:17 - be Revelation 22:14 - may have
Cross-References
And God blessed Noe and his sonnes, and sayde vnto them: increace & multiplye, and fyll the earth.
Beholde, I make my couenaunt with you, and with youre sede after you,
and with euery lyuynge creature that is with you, both foule, catell, and all beastes vpon the earth with you, of all that is gone out of the Arke, what so euer beast of the earth it be:
And Noe lyued after the floude thre hundreth & fiftie yeare,
so yt his whole age was ix. hudreth and fyftie yeare, and so he dyed.
Thou shalt not kyll.
He that smyteth a man that he dye, shall dye the death.
Thou shalt let no preuy accuser go amoge ye people. Nether shalt thou stonde agaynst yi neghbours bloude: for I am ye LORDE.
And why? he maketh inquysicion for their bloude, and remembreth them: he forgetteth not the complaynte of the poore.
that vpon you maye come all the righteous bloude which hath bene shed vpon ye earth, from the bloude of righteous Abel, vnto ye bloude of Zachary ye sonne of Barachias, whom ye slew betwene the temple and the altare.
Gill's Notes on the Bible
Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife,.... The phrase "a sister, a wife", is an Hebraism, and answers to
אחתיכלה, "my sister, spouse", Song of Solomon 4:9. The Jews called their wives, sisters, not on account of religion, which also is not the meaning here; but because of the common relation that men and women, all mankind, stand in to one another, antecedent to any nearer relation, as that of man and wife. The sense the Papists put on these words, to secure them from being a proof of the lawfulness of the marriage of the ministers of the Gospel, can by no means be the true one; which is, that they are to be understood of a rich woman, or women, the apostles had a power to carry about with them, to minister of their substance to them, and provide for them; for such a sense is directly contrary to the subject and argument the apostle is upon; which is to show the right that he and others had, of casting themselves entirely upon the churches for a maintenance; whereas this is contriving a way for relieving the churches of such a charge; besides, the act of "leading", or carrying "about", is expressive of such a power over them, as cannot be thought to agree with persons of such substance; and whose voluntary act this must be, to go along with them and supply them; add to this, that for the apostles to lead about with them wherever they went women, whether rich or poor, that were not their wives, would be of no good report, and must tend to hurt their character and reputation: moreover, though these words clearly imply the lawfulness of a minister's marriage, and suppose it, yet they do not express the act itself, or the lawfulness of entering into such a state, but rather what follows after it; and the sense is this, that the apostle and others, supposing them to have wives, and it may be added also, and children, they had a right to take these with them wherever they went, and insist upon the maintenance of them, as well as of their own, at the public expense:
as well as other apostles; who it seems did so, that had wives and families, as Philip the Evangelist had four daughters, Acts 21:8.
And as the brethren of the Lord: who it seems were married persons, and took such a method; by whom are meant James, Joses, Judas, and Simon; who were the near kinsmen of Christ, it being usual with the Jews to call such brethren:
and Cephas; that is, Peter, who it is certain had a wife; see Matthew 8:14 and therefore it is with a very ill grace that the pope, who pretends to be Peter's successor, should forbid the marriage of ecclesiastical persons.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Have we not power? - Have we not a right? The objection here seems to have been, that Paul and Barnabas were unmarried, or at least that they traveled without wives. The objectors urged that others had wives, and that they took them with them, and expected provision to be made for them as well as for themselves. They therefore showed that they felt that they had a claim to support for their families, and that they were conscious that they were sent of God. But Paul and Barnabas had no families. And the objectors inferred that they were conscious that they had no claim to the apostleship, and no right to support. To this Paul replies as before, that they had a right to do as others did, but they chose not to do it for other reasons than that they were conscious that they had no such right.
To lead about - To have in attendance with us; to conduct from place to place; and to have them maintained at the expense of the churches amongst which we labor.
A sister, a wife - Margin, “or woman.” This phrase has much perplexed commentators. But the simple meaning seems to be, A wife who should be a Christian, and regarded as sustaining the relation of a Christian sister.” Probably Paul meant to advert to the fact that the wives of the apostles were and should be Christians; and that it was a matter of course, that if an apostle led about a wife she would be a Christian; or that he would marry no other; compare 1 Corinthians 3:11.
As well as other apostles - It is evident from this that the apostles generally were married. The phrase used here is οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι hoi loipoi apostoloi (“the remaining apostles,” or the other apostles). And if they were married, it is right and proper for ministers to marry now, whatever the papist may say to the contrary. It is safer to follow the example of the apostles than the opinions of the papal church. The reasons why the apostles had wives with them on their journeys may have been various. They may have been either to give instruction and counsel to those of their own sex to whom the apostles could not have access, or to minister to the needs of their husbands as they traveled. It is to be remembered that they traveled among pagans; they had no acquaintance and no friends there; they therefore took with them their female friends and wives to minister to them, and sustain them in sickness, trial, etc. Paul says that he and Barnabas had a right to do this; but they had not used this right because they chose rather to make the gospel without charge 1 Corinthians 9:18, and that thus they judged they could do more good. It follows from this:
(1) That it is right for ministers to marry, and that the papal doctrine of the celibacy of the clergy is contrary to apostolic example.
(2) It is right for missionaries to marry, and to take their wives with them to pagan lands. The apostles were missionaries, and spent their lives in pagan nations as missionaries do now, and there may be as good reasons for missionaries marrying now as there were then.
(3) Yet there are people, like Paul, who can do more good without being married. There are circumstances, like his, where it is not advisable that they should marry, and there can be no doubt that Paul regarded the unmarried state for a missionary as preferable and advisable. Probably the same is to be said of most missionaries at the present day, that they could do more good if unmarried, than they can if burdened with the cares of families.
And as the brethren of the Lord - The brothers of the Lord Jesus, James and Joses, and Simon and Judas, Matthew 13:55. It seems from this, that although at first they did not believe in him John 7:5, and had regarded him as disgraced Mark 3:21, yet that they had subsequently become converted, and were employed as ministers and evangelists. It is evident also from this statement that they were married, and were attended with their wives in their travels.
And Cephas - Peter; see the note at John 1:42. This proves:
(1) As well as the declaration in Matthew 8:14, that Peter had been married.
(2) That he had a wife after he became an apostle, and while engaged in the work of the ministry.
(3) That his wife accompanied him in his travels.
(4) That it is right and proper for ministers and missionaries to be married now.
Is it not strange that the pretended successor of Peter, the pope of Rome, should forbid marriage when Peter himself was married? Is it not a proof how little the papacy regards the Bible, and the example and authority of those from whom it pretends to derive its power? And is it not strange that this doctrine of the celibacy of the clergy, which has been the source of abomination, impurity, and licentiousness everywhere, should have been sustained and countenanced at all by the Christian world? And is it not strange that this, with all the other corrupt doctrines of the papacy, should be attempted to be imposed on the enlightened people of the United States, or of Great Britain, as a part of the religion of Christ?
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse 1 Corinthians 9:5. Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife — The word εξουσιαν is to be understood here, as above in 1 Corinthians 9:4, as implying authority or right; and authority, not merely derived from their office, but from Him who gave them that office; from the constitution of nature; and from universal propriety or the fitness of things.
When the apostle speaks of leading about a sister, a wife, he means first, that he and all other apostles, and consequently all ministers of the Gospel, had a right to marry. For it appears that our Lord's brethren James and Jude were married; and we have infallible evidence that Peter was a married man, not only from this verse, but from Matthew 8:14, where his mother-in-law is mentioned as being cured by our Lord of a fever.
And secondly, we find that their wives were persons of the same faith; for less can never be implied in the word sister. This is a decisive proof against the papistical celibacy of the clergy: and as to their attempts to evade the force of this text by saying that the apostles had holy women who attended them, and ministered to them in their peregrinations, there is no proof of it; nor could they have suffered either young women or other men's wives to have accompanied them in this way without giving the most palpable occasion of scandal. And Clemens Alexandrinus has particularly remarked that the apostles carried their wives about with them, "not as wives, but as sisters, that they might minister to those who were mistresses of families; that so the doctrine of the Lord might without reprehension or evil suspicion enter into the apartments of the women." And in giving his finished picture of his Gnostic, or perfect Christian, he says: εσθιει, και πινει, και γαμει - εικονας εχει τους Αποστολους, He eats, and drinks, and marries - having the apostles for his example. Vid. Clem. Alex. Strom., lib. vii., c. 12.
On the propriety and excellence of marriage, and its superiority to celibacy, see the notes on chap. 1 Corinthians 7:0.
