Summary (Click here for the short story)
In the statement “I have become all things to all people” Paul generalises and sums up an explanation of the principle which governs his stance towards different categories of people in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23. His explanation functions first as defence of his social behaviour which differed according to social context and then as an example for their Corinthians in their use of Christian freedom. Paul outlines the status which undergirds him, the behavioural stance he adopts, and the goal which motivates him in taking that stance. His status is that he is free from all people, he is not bound by the Mosaic law, and that his life is directed by his relationship to Christ and his Gospel. Although Paul is free he has voluntarily enslaved himself to all by deliberately identifying himself with various groups of people whether Jews Gentiles or “the weak”, by accommodating to their cultural, ethical and religious norms. His aim was to use all possible means to see as many as possible converted and brought to final glory in heaven. The only limit on his willingness to accommodate was therefore the imperative of the Gospel itself. Paul put this principle into effect by accommodating his social conduct, and his preaching and teaching to the various social and cultural contexts in which he worked. For the sake of the Jews he submitted to food laws and the synagogue, and performed certain Jewish rites when occasion warranted. With Gentiles he ate whatever was put before him. In his pastoral teaching and evangelistic preaching Paul related to his hearers on their own ground and adjusted as far as possible to their background and ways of thinking in order to bring them to an understanding of Christ and the Christian life.
1. Introduction
With the words “I have become all things to all people” the Apostle Paul summed up an explanation of the principle which was foundational to his mission. Interestingly, these words appear in common parlance today with various meanings. Often they are an expression of frustration – used by those who feel that they are being called upon to meet the demands of too many people at the one time. For someone to be “all things to all people” can also infer that they are lacking in their own convictions, or that they are like an unprincipled salesperson in relationships. In Christian circles being “all things to all people” is either ignored as a Biblical principle or carelessly used to justify any assimilation to various lifestyles. This essay attempts to determine the meaning of the principle which was originally conveyed in the words “I have become all things to all people” by examining the whole argument in which they appeared, and by pointing out some of the ways Paul used it in his own life.
2. Paul’s explanation of his principle
In the statement “I have become all things to all people” Paul generalises and sums up claims that he has made regarding his stance towards different categories of people in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23. The broader context of this passage is 1 Corinthians 8:1-11:1, all of which is generated by the question of eating food sacrificed to idols which had been raised by the Corinthians. Paul forbids the eating of such food as part of pagan cultic meals, but regards the eating of it when bought in the market or served in an unbeliever’s house as a matter of freedom – he ate or did not eat depending on context. It seems that his strict pronouncement on the one hand and his personal flexibility on the other were not well received or understood by the Corinthians, and so they made various criticisms of him.[1]
In 1 Corinthians 9:1-18 Paul defends his apostolic authority and explains how he gave up his right to financial support for the sake of his Gospel preaching. In 9:19-23, he defends charges of inconsistency[2] by explaining the principle behind his social behaviour, which differed according to the context.[3] He had become “all things to all people” so that he might save as many as possible. This was the principle which guided Paul in his use of Christian freedom, and which Paul exhorts the Corinthians to adopt.[4] In their conduct in areas of freedom they were not to seek their own advantage but the advantage of others that they might be saved.
Most sentences in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23, contain a concessive clause in which Paul defines his status, freedoms and restraints, a verb which describes the behavioural stance he adopts in various contexts, and a purpose clause revealing the goal which motivates him in taking that stance.[5]
2.1 Paul’s status – free in Christ
Firstly, Paul speaks of himself as “free with respect to all”.[6] He is free from the imposition of any other person. He cannot be manipulated through financial dependency,[7] nor by the dictates of another person’s conscience.[8]
Then he states that he is “not under the law”. In the context this has particular reference to Paul’s freedom from Jewish legal requirements, especially those relating to food.[9] But Paul probably means something even more profound. He is free from such requirements because it is no longer the Mosaic code which binds him to God nor marks his identity as a person.[10] The Law of Moses has no claim upon his personal conduct.
However, Paul is not lawless, superficial, or a “mere weathercock”,[11] for he is “not free from God’s law”, but is rather “under Christ’s law”. He is still subject to all that God demands of him, but this is now mediated through the person of Christ rather than the Mosaic law.[12] This includes the idea that Paul is obliged to keep “the law as taught and as lived out by Jesus”,[13] which is in fact the true meaning and highest expression of Torah – the law of love.[14] This does not mean that Paul merely has an updated set of regulations to follow,[15] for his emphasis is on “relationship with and service of a Person, not submission to a code.”[16] His whole way of life is guided by the Spirit of Christ himself and all that Christ has done and stands for.[17] Paul’s freedom from all people and from regulations is bound up with his new status and identity in Christ. His Christian status means that categories of Jew and Gentile are incidental to his essential identity.[18]
2.2 Paul’s overall stance – “a slave to all”
Although Paul is “free with respect to all”, he has taken the stance of “a slave to all”. The subsequent statements show how he gave expression to that stance in respect to different groups of people. “As far as possible he has deliberately identified himself with those whom he has sought to win for the Gospel”[19] by adapting his lifestyle to be like theirs.
The first group Paul mentions is the Jews. At some point he had “become as a Jew” to the Jews. What this meant for him is indicated by his further reference to “those under the law”. In his day the distinguishing mark of the Jew was that he or she kept the law,[20] and yet Paul himself was no longer obliged to do so. However, when in a Jewish social setting, including proselytes and God-fearers,[21] he voluntarily observed Jewish law and customs.
On the other hand, Paul also moved in Gentile contexts, as indicated by the reference to “those outside the law”. There again he modified his behaviour accordingly.[22] No longer bound by the peculiarities of Jewish tradition, the Apostle crossed the barriers between Jew and Gentile[23] to identify with the latter by living as they did. There were many different ethnic and religious groups within the Roman Empire, each encouraged to live in accordance with their own traditions,[24] and Paul’s claim implies an ability to adapt across a very wide range of cultural, ethical and religious norms.[25]
“The weak” whom Paul mentions as a final specific group may refer to Christians who are weak in conscience,[26] or to those who are weak in a more sociological sense.[27] In either case, Paul again voluntarily restricted himself in order to identify with such people.
“I have become all things to all people” then restates the nature of Paul’s enslavement in general terms. There are strong parallels between the description of Paul’s stance here and his summaries of the Gospel where he speaks of an interchange between Christ and the people he came to save.[28] “Christ became what we are, … he was sent into our condition, in order that we might become what he is. Paul, in turn, became what the men and women to whom he was proclaiming the Gospel were, in order that he might gain them for the Gospel.”[29]
2.3 Paul’s goal – the salvation of men and women
It has already become clear that Paul did not adapt himself to different groups of people merely for the sake of fitting in or making them feel comfortable. His aim was to “win” or “gain” more of them, and to “save” some by all means. The verb “to win” was a missionary term in contemporary Judaism and together with the more common synonym “save” may be understood as referring to the goal of bringing people to faith in Christ.[30] It is somewhat artificial, however, to say that these terms “can only refer to evangelizing”,[31] for Paul does not separate conversion from ongoing and eschatological aspects of salvation. “‘Win’ or ‘save’ then speaks not only of the initial activity whereby a person comes to faith, but of the whole process by which (a person) is brought to glory.”[32]
“All things to all people” therefore functions for Paul as both a missionary principle and a pastoral principle.[33]
Paul’s final statement of purpose is that he does it all for the sake of the gospel so that he “may share in its blessings”.[34] The implication that Paul is in the end only seeking his own good may be avoided by rendering the purpose clause “so that others may share in its benefits with me“.[35] However, the active sense of the clause means that Paul’s purpose is to share in the work of the Gospel – to be a fellow-worker with the Gospel in its “dynamic progress”.[36] Hooker contends that both senses must be held together for “the only way to receive those benefits (of the Gospel) is to share in ministry – to be a partner in the Gospel in every sense of the term.”[37] For Paul there is simply no other way of being a Christian![38]
2.4 The principle of accommodation
The Pauline principle expressed in the words “I have become all things to all men”, which may conveniently be called Paul’s “principle of accommodation”,[39] was foundational to his mission in life. As a Christian, Paul was both free from all and committed to the salvation of all. He could no longer see the various religious and social traditions of Jews and Gentiles as relevant in themselves to a person’s salvation, but he did recognise them as the life-situations in which people would hear the Gospel of Christ and live out their response to it.[40] He therefore “made himself the most versatile and adaptable of men”,[41] accommodating his conduct so as to be identified as closely as possible with the different groups of people he was seeking to win to Christ.[42]
The only limit on his willingness to accommodate was therefore the imperative of the Gospel itself. He was not seeking to remove the essential challenge of his message but to clarify it in ways appropriate to various contexts.[43]
3. Paul’s principle in practice (coming soon)
[1] Gordon D. Fee, The first epistle to the Corinthians, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 424-425.
[2] H. Chadwick, ‘All things to all men’, New Testament Studies 1:4 (1955): 261-275.
[3] Peter T. O’Brien, Consumed by passion: Paul and the dynamic of the gospel (Homebush West, NSW: Lancer, 1993), 92.
[4] 1 Corinthians 10:31-11:1.
[5] Günther Bornkamm, ‘The missionary stance of Paul in 1 Corinthians 9 and in Acts’, in Studies in Luke-Acts, ed. Leander E. Keck and J. Louis Martyn (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980), 194-207.
[6] Compare NIV, “I am free and belong to no man.”
[7] Fee, First Corinthians, 425-426.
[8] See 1 Corinthians 9:1; 10:29.
[9] O’Brien, Consumed by passion,93, 97.
[10] D. A. Carson, The cross and Christian ministry: an exposition of passages from 1 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House: 1993), 118-119.
[11] Chadwick, ‘All things to all men’, 261.
[12] Carson, Christian ministry, 120.
[13] James D. G. Dunn, The theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 658.
[14] This understanding is developed in Dunn, Theology of Paul, 649-658.
[15] On this see especially the discussion of Stephen Barton, ‘Was Paul a relativist?’, Interchange 19(1976): 164-192.
[16] Barton, ‘Was Paul a relativist?’, 169.
[17] Colin G. Kruse, Paul, the law and justification (Leicester: Apollos, 1996), 130. Also Dunn, Theology of Paul, 668-669.
[18] Peter Richardson and Paul W. Gooch. ‘Accommodation Ethics’, Tyndale Bulletin 29 (1978): 89-142.
[19] Morna D. Hooker, ‘A partner in the Gospel: Paul’s understanding of his ministry’, in Theology and ethics in Paul and his interpreters, ed. Eugene H. Lovering Junior and Jerry L. Sumney (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 83-100.
[20] This was the common factor across all Jewish sects who differed only in their interpretation of the law. See H. L. Ellison, ‘Paul and the law – “all things to all men”‘, in Apostolic history and the gospel: Biblical and historical essays presented to F. F. Bruce on his 60 birthday, ed. W. Ward Gasque and Ralph P. Martin (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1970), 195-202. 198.
[21] O’Brien, Consumed by passion, 97.
[22] Ellison rejects this understanding of the passage, contending that Paul could not have modified his outward living as he moved in different social circles for he never ceased to consistently observe Jewish law. His contention leads him to an alternative interpretation of the passage which is strained and totally out of keeping with its context. See his ‘Paul and the law’, 199-202.
[23] Compare Ephesians 2:14-16.
[24] Ellison, ‘Paul and the law’, 197.
[25] Barton, ‘Was Paul a relativist?’, 168.
[26] As in 1 Corinthians 8. See Ellison, ‘Paul and the law’, 196.
[27] As most of the Corinthian Christians apparently were (1 Corinthians 1:26-31). Fee, First Corinthians, 431.
[28] For example 2 Corinthians 5:21; 8:9; Galatians 3:13; 4:4-5. See Hooker, ‘Partner in the Gospel’, 90.
[29] Hooker, ‘Partner in the Gospel’, 91. Italics original. For a discussion of specific occasions where the Jesus of the Synoptics accommodates his behaviour to the needs of others see Richardson and Gooch, ‘Accommodation ethics’, 131-140.
[30] O’Brien, Consumed by passion, 95.
[31] Fee, First Corinthians, 427.
[32] O’Brien, Consumed by passion, 95. This understanding also better fits the overall context where there is concern for those both within and without the Christian community. For example “the weak” in 1 Corinthians 8 and “the church of God” in 10:32. See further comments on this in Kruse, Paul, 131.
[33] Dunn, Theology of Paul, 576.
[34] 1 Corinthians 9:23.
[35] Hooker, ‘A partner in the Gospel, 86. (Italics original). Fee settles on a similar understanding in First Corinthians, 432.
[36] O’Brien, Consumed by passion, 96. This understanding is developed at greater length by Hooker, ‘A partner in the Gospel’, 85-89.
[37] Hooker, ‘A partner in the Gospel’, 89. (Italics original).
[38] Carson, Christian ministry, 135.
[39] Use of the term “accommodation” is justified by Richardson and Gooch, who also go on to define three different types of accommodation – theological, epistemological, and ethical, in ‘Accommodation Ethics’, 89-93, 98-100.
[40] Bornkamm, ‘Missionary stance’, 196. “Eschatological reality can be expressed equally through a ‘Gentile’ body and a ‘Jewish’ body.” writes Robin Scroggs, ‘Paul and the eschatological body’, in Theology and ethics in Paul and his interpreters, ed. Eugene H. Lovering Jr. and Jerry L. Sumney (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 14-29.
[41] F. F. Bruce, Paul: apostle of the heart set free, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 456.
[42] Kruse, Paul, 129.
[43] Bornkamm, ‘Missionary stance’, 197.