For being free from all, I have made myself bondman to all, that I might gain the most [possible].
Paul has just defended his right to be paid by the people he serves — then explained why he refused to use it. Verse 19 gives the reason: a man who owed nothing to anyone put himself at everyone's service — so what kind of freedom acts like that, and what does it win?
The freedom Paul claims is freedom from human control over his service. Critics said he had no authority, because no one in Jerusalem had sent him.
Paul was not under a yoke to anyone in his service, only to the Lord, of course. He was free in that sense… He did not serve out of his own will, but he was still free from man. Peter did not send him. That was what they charged against him; he had not seen the apostle; he did not come from Jerusalem. In verse 19 we find what "free" is: "Though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all."
Nothing forced this service on him. He chose it, and love was the motive — the same love that made him preach without charge.
In this way nothing hindered the gospel; it became more effective… This was his reward: to preach the gospel free of charge. Love governed him, and he had become a servant of all. He gave up his rights. He did not insist on his Christian freedom, but gave up his liberty so that "by all means I might save some."
"That I might win more of them" names a profit, but not his own. He would concede anything that was not Christ, and nothing that was.
The apostle was ready to yield at every side where Christ was not concerned. He was free — but free to be a bondman to anyone and everyone, so that he might gain, not ends of his own, but the most possible for Christ. So among the Jews he raised no question about the law. His heart was set on their salvation, and legal questions would not turn him aside… That was the only gain he sought — not what was theirs, but them; and them for God, not shaped to fit his own opinions or prejudices.
Serving everyone meant entering other people's world — their background, their weakness. It never meant loosening his own standards.
If they were weak, he would come down beside them. His aim was to show them the weakness that finds its answer of strength in Christ, and to gain them for Him. Becoming "all things to all people" never meant giving up proper moral principles. It meant sacrificing his own comfort and natural preferences to enter into the circumstances of others.
This yielding has limits, so it never becomes one rule for every situation.
We may learn from this to resist the idea that only one principle can govern our conduct. That is not so when the relationships and circumstances of the people involved are completely different. Wisdom would then seek the Spirit's instruction from God's word to guide us in each separate case… An eye fixed on Christ alone and on His grace will find the true way. Grace knows where to stand firm and when to yield.
People often stretch this verse to justify joining any religious group they hope to reach. One writer answers that Paul bent toward outsiders, not toward divisions among believers.
The argument is, "If Paul became as a Jew to the Jews, we ought to become as Wesleyans to the Wesleyans," etc. A careful reading of the passage shows the error in that conclusion. Such a statement contradicts the apostle's teaching about the church of God. The mistake is this: it puts people who profess the name of the Lord in the same class as those who may deny Him. Belonging to a kingdom and joining in its divisions is surely not the same as always having belonged to the enemy's ranks!
This pattern is not just for an apostle. God gives liberty for a purpose, and the purpose is other people.
Let us remember that no one is able to give liberty to himself. If the love of God has given us liberty, it is so that, by this love in us, we may serve one another. He has made us free from self, free from independence, free from our own wills. We are to act as God acts, as He has acted in Christ — not to please ourselves, but to serve one another in love.
Real service holds freedom and subjection together, and the model for both is Christ.
"Am I not free?" asked the apostle in 1 Corinthians 9:1. I am "free from all" (v. 19), he said, about the work entrusted to him, though he made himself servant of all for their good. Still, he was truly subject… It is the Son who makes us "FREE INDEED," for the Son is free. But He took the form of a servant, and said Himself, "I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father."
- Free — free from every human master, answerable to the Lord alone; no one sent him, and no one owned him.
- Freely enslaved — he did not guard that liberty; love spent it in service to everybody.
- Free to gain — the profit sought was people, won for God, not for his own influence or opinions.
- Free within limits — he gave up comfort and preference, never principle. Grace knows when to yield and when to stand firm.
- Free like Christ — the Son is free, yet He took the form of a servant. Our freedom exists for the same end: to serve one another in love.
And I became to the Jews as a Jew, in order that I might gain the Jews to those under law, as under law, not being myself under law, in order that I might gain those under law
Paul has just said that he is free from all, yet has made himself a servant of all. Verse 20 shows what that looked like among Jewish people, and it raises two questions: how far did he bend, and was he back under the law himself?
Older English Bibles left out a clause after "as under the law." The ESV keeps it: "though not being myself under the law." One writer welcomes the revisers who put it back, and calls the change decisive.
In 1 Corinthians 9:20 there is an addition of great importance... The Revisers have restored the clause left out after "as under the law," namely, "not being myself under law." Many of our readers know that all competent scholars have long admitted that this clause was thrown out with no good reason... Read rightly, it settles the much-debated question of whether the Christian is still under law.
Another writer asks what took the law's place for Paul.
After the second word "law" in verse 20 a clause has been left out: "not being myself under law." It is recognised as belonging to the text by all who have examined it. He puts subjection to Christ in the place of being under law.
So how far did Paul bend? One writer keeps the answer very concrete.
All he means by "to those under the law, as under law" is something like this: he would not eat pork if he were sitting at table with a Jew. Timothy was circumcised on some such principle... In dealing with Jews he adapted himself to them, but the moment the Jews made the law necessary, he stood against them. He would not give way about Titus, because they were making it necessary.
Paul's flexibility had a hard limit. And the group he was reaching stretched beyond one nation.
While he was tender toward the Jewish conscience, he stood against their doctrinal claims like a rock... The class referred to here includes not only those born Jews, but all of any nation who had learnt and accepted the teaching of Moses.
Twice in this verse Paul gives the same reason: to win people. One writer asks what winning them actually meant to him.
Among the Jews he raised no question about the law. His heart was set on their salvation; he would not turn aside for legal questions... Such was the only gain he sought — not their things, but them; and them for God, not to shape them after any opinions or prejudices of his own.
People often stretch this verse to cover behaviour Paul never had in mind.
How often, when we meet unconverted people, do we slip into the current of their thoughts and find a subject in common with them! Some mourn over this; others defend it. The defence rests on a mistaken view of the apostle's words, "I have become all things to all people." It does not mean that he entered into the folly and nonsense of worldly men... It means that Paul denied himself among all classes of men so that he might "by all means save some."
Commentators warn about a second misuse. Some read the verse as permission to join whatever religious group they are trying to reach. One writer answers that Paul never became a follower of Apollos or Cephas in order to win their followers. Those who profess the Lord's name do not stand in the same class as those outside (The Bible Treasury).
Where did Paul get this ability? One writer traces it back to his Master.
How graciously He gained the confidence of the woman at the well!... Divine adaptability was His, which drew the tax collectors and sinners to the side of Him who was the Light of the world. Precious Saviour! And Paul got his adaptability from his Master. The way for us to gain it is not to set our minds to manufacture it by willpower. It is to be so occupied with the Lord Jesus Christ, so in communion with Him, that without noticing it we drink in more of His spirit and learn His ways.
- Free — Paul was free from all. He used that freedom to serve all, so he could win as many people as possible.
- Not under — the restored clause, "though not being myself under the law," shows he never went back under the law he was adapting to. Subjection to Christ took its place.
- Bent — the bending was real, but small. He would skip pork at a Jewish table. He gave way on customs, never on doctrine, as his stand over Titus shows.
- Gained — the aim was the people themselves, not their things. He sought them for God, not for his own opinions.
- Learnt — this skill is not self-made. It comes from Christ, by staying close to Him.
to those without law, as without law, (not as without law to God, but as legitimately subject to Christ,) in order that I might gain [those] without law.
Paul is describing how he reached people who never had the law of Moses. Then he stops himself with a note in brackets. Meeting a lawless world on its own ground could look like lawlessness, so he says what governs him instead.
Start with the people in view. Who does the phrase describe?
The word is ἄνομος. It is translated 'without law' in 1 Cor. 9:21, and it describes those who ignore all law and do their own will.
The line runs between nations. Commentators note the same split elsewhere in the apostle's argument: "Gentiles had no law, Jews had; and this was a main part of the different ground on which they would be judged."
The words in brackets are a guard. Verse 20 has a similar guard that later copies dropped, and putting it back changes how the whole passage reads.
The apostle describes how he became all things to all men. He says he became "to those under the law, as under the law." Then he adds a clause that the received text leaves out, though everyone competent to judge accepts it as genuine: "not being myself under law." The next verse implies the same thing, for he goes on, "To those without law, as without law (not being without law to God, but under the law to Christ)." "Under the law to Christ" is a very different phrase from the usual "under the law." It is, in fact, ennomos christo — translated by some as "enlawed to Christ," by others as "legitimately subject to Christ."
Older translations read "under the law to Christ"; the ESV has "under the law of Christ."
If Paul is not under law, what holds him? Commentators answer that a Person holds him. Obedience follows as fruit, not as a way of gaining standing.
They are "under grace" (Rom. 6:14), and "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" sets them free from "the law of sin and death." So they are kept "under law to Christ," or "legitimately subject to Christ" (1 Cor. 9:21), and made able to fulfil all the righteous requirements of the law (Rom. 8:4). This is not how they gain or keep a position before God. It is the fruit of the grace that has already set them in the place of richest favour.
The bracketed words also explain his method. Paul studied his hearers and cleared away needless obstacles to his message.
When he approached the man without law, he did so on that basis. Only he was always careful to make clear that he himself was not a lawless man, but rightly subject to the Lord. Clearly, then, the apostle studied the people he approached, and their personal ways, so that he might avoid anything that would needlessly turn them against the Gospel he brought. He was nothing like the mistaken spirit that says, "God can save and take care of His own elect," and then almost hurls the Gospel at people's heads, without much care about the result.
Some read the verse as permission to blend in with the world. Commentators reject that.
Such is the flexibility of grace… It was not, as some shamefully misuse his words, an excuse for tampering with the world and sparing one's own flesh, which really means becoming Satan's prey. His was self-sacrifice in a faith that had only Christ for its object, and that brought every soul within reach into contact with His love.
Where does such flexibility come from? One writer traces it to its source.
Divine adaptability was His, and it drew the tax collectors and the sinners to the side of Him who was the Light of the world. Precious Saviour! And Paul got his adaptability from his Master. We do not gain it by setting our minds to manufacture it by willpower. We gain it by being taken up with the Lord Jesus Christ, and by being in communion with Him, until without noticing it we drink in more of His spirit and learn His ways.
- Free — The restored clause in verse 20, "not being myself under law," shows Paul claiming full freedom from law before God.
- Bound — Freedom is not emptiness. "Under law to Christ" is ennomos christo, "legitimately subject to Christ" — a Person, not a code, holds him.
- Fruitful — Under grace, the believer fulfils what the law rightly requires. It is the fruit of a position already given, never the price of one.
- Flexible — Because he is free, he can meet each hearer on their own ground. He studies them, so nothing needless blocks the message.
- Faithful — He bends in comfort and preference, never in the truth. This is self-sacrifice learned from Christ, not a licence to tamper with the world.
I became to the weak, [as] weak, in order that I might gain the weak. To all I have become all things, in order that at all events I might save some.
Paul has just listed the people he met on their own ground: Jews, those under law, those without law, the weak. Here he sums it up in one line, and it raises a sharp question. How far may a Christian bend to reach someone?
Paul was free, and he used that freedom to serve. One writer marks where this bending belonged:
Being free from all, he had made himself the servant of all, so that he might win as many as he could. Notice that this was in his service. It was not fitting in with the world to escape the offence of the cross. He stated that plainly (1 Corinthians 2:2). But in preaching it, he adapted himself to the religious capacity and to the ways of thinking of each group. He did this to gain access for the truth into their minds.
People often quote this phrase to excuse slipping into the talk and thinking of the crowd around them. One writer names that defence and answers it:
Sometimes people mourn over this; sometimes they defend it. The defence rests on a mistaken view of the apostle's words, "I have become all things to all people." This does not mean that he entered into the folly and nonsense of worldly men. By no means... It means that Paul denied himself among all classes of men, so that he might "by all means save some." His aim was to bring sinners to Christ, not to please himself.
Becoming all things to all people took work. It meant studying the hearer, and clearing away every needless obstacle:
It is clear then that the apostle studied the people he approached, and their particular ways. He wanted to avoid anything that would needlessly turn them against the message he brought. He was far removed from that mistaken spirit that says, "God can save and take care of His own elect." That spirit almost hurls the gospel at people's heads, with little care about the result.
Paul went low for the "weak," those with the most fragile consciences. Yet his flexibility had a limit and a motive:
He would not wound the scruples of the feeblest; indeed, to the weak he became weak, that he might gain the weak... He did not mean, as some shamefully misuse his words to claim, that we may tamper with the world and spare our own flesh. That is really to become the prey of Satan. His was self-sacrifice in a faith that had only Christ for its object. His aim was to bring every soul within reach into contact with His love.
Paul did not invent this ability. He learned it from his Master, and it grows by nearness to Him:
How graciously He gained the confidence of the woman at the well! ...Divine adaptability was His. It drew the tax collectors and the sinners to the side of Him who was the Light of the world. Precious Saviour! And Paul got his adaptability from his Master. We do not gain it by setting our minds to manufacture it by willpower. We gain it by being so occupied with the Lord Jesus Christ, so in communion with Him, that without noticing it we drink in more of His spirit and learn His ways.
The last clause gives the aim of it all. What drives it is the state of the heart:
If we are to be successful in our testimony, our hearts must be in tune with the great compassionate heart of God. We must develop a yearning over the perishing, and it should be our prayer and labour that we may "by all means save some."
- Free → servant. Paul owed no one anything. He used that freedom to become everyone's servant and win as many as he could.
- Servant → study. Serving meant learning how people think. Paul cleared away every needless obstacle instead of throwing the message at them.
- Study → limits. He would not wound the weakest conscience. But he never used that freedom as an excuse to tamper with the world.
- Limits → source. Willpower does not produce this flexibility. It grows in communion with Christ, who drew sinners to Himself.
- Source → "save some." The chain has one end: a heart in tune with God's compassion, praying and working that some may be saved.
And I do all things for the sake of the glad tidings, that I may be fellow-partaker with them.
Paul has just described how far he would bend to reach Jews, those under law, those without law, and the weak. Now he gives his one reason — and raises two questions: what did the gospel cost him, and what does it mean to share in a message you already believe?
Paul's rule left nothing out. He refused even the support he had every right to claim:
Even what Christ has sent me, I do not take, for His sake. I glory in this, that I have given up everything I had a right to, for the gospel's sake. It is a very strong expression. Better for me to die than to do anything that would hinder the gospel.
The word carries more weight here than a short appeal to unbelievers. One writer gives it both a wide and a narrow sense:
The Gospel, as Paul knew and preached it, is the doctrine of Christ. It is the complete setting forth of God, as He is now declared by the Spirit in His testimony to the Son. In its full sense, therefore, it includes all that the One who glorifies Jesus can reveal of Him... In its narrower and more common sense, it means God's message or command to people as such. It is His free and pressing invitation to all who will own that they are helpless sinners in His sight. They may receive His own righteousness in exchange for their sins, and confess Jesus and Him crucified as the ground of their hope of glory, giving up all trust in themselves.
after_note: DISCARD
One writer draws the line that Paul's flexibility never crossed:
Being "made all things to all men" was in no way giving up proper moral principles. It was sacrificing his own comfort and natural preferences to enter into the circumstances of others.
Some twist the phrase into a licence for worldliness. One writer answers them:
He did not do it, as some shamefully twist his words to say, to excuse playing along with the world and sparing one's own flesh. That really means becoming the prey of Satan. His was self-sacrifice, in a faith that had only Christ for its object, and in bringing every soul within his reach into contact with His love.
The closing clause is the surprise of the verse. Paul already had the gospel. What he wanted was a share in what it does:
To Paul, then, the Gospel, in all its rich and full meaning, was everything. He lived for it, and by it he would stand or fall. He wanted to be a partaker not of it only, but with it also — to share in its ever-blessed fruits as it prospered, by the grace of God, in his own hands as a fellow worker with God. He also wanted his brothers and his children in the faith to be his partners in this joy.
Another writer reads it the same way: the good news itself is the partner Paul shares with:
Moreover, he acted this way for the sake of the glad tidings, which he speaks of as a person when he says, "that I may be fellow-partaker with them."
Preaching, however faithful, settles nothing about the preacher:
Preaching to others was not all. He might do that, and as far as he himself went, it might be wasted labour. He might lose everything — rejected in the end himself, if he was not himself a Christian. He was a Christian first of all, then a preacher, and a good preacher, because he was a Christian first.
- Cost. Paul gave up every right he could have claimed, rather than block the gospel. He would sooner die than hinder it.
- Content. "The gospel" is far more than a short appeal. It is God's free invitation to helpless sinners, and all that the Spirit reveals of the Son.
- Limit. He adapted his manner, never his morals. Entering someone else's world cost him comfort. It never meant playing along with the world.
- Share. He wanted to be a partner with the gospel, not just a receiver of it. He worked alongside God and shared the fruit.
- Test. The share is personal before it is public. Paul was a Christian first, a preacher second. Preaching alone proves nothing.