Lessons #295 and 296
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 1. It is best to use this note after you have listened to the lessons because there are +
+ comments given in the actual delivery not in the note. +
+ 2. The Bible abbreviations are as follows: CEV =Contemporary English version, +
+ CEB = Common English Bible, ESV= English Standard Version, +
+ GW = God’s Word Translation, ISV = International Standard Version, +
+ NAB=New English Bible, NASB= New American Standard Bible, +
+ NEB= New English Bible, NET = New English Translation, +
+ NLT = New Living Translations NJB = New Jerusalem Bible, +
+ NJV = New Jewish Bible, TEV = Today’s English Version. +
+AMP = Amplified Bible, UBS = United Bible Society +
+ 3. Notes have not been edited for grammatical errors. +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adaptability for the sake of the gospel (1 Cor 9:19-23)
19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.
The message of this section of 1 Corinthians 9:19-23 that we are considering is that You should do everything that is lawful to advance God’s word. The message is based on the fact Apostle Paul conveyed that he adapts to whatever group he interacts with in such a way that he would present the basic truth of the gospel or the Christian doctrine without compromising it. In our last study, we noted that the apostle declared that he became subservient to the interests of others in order to gain as many converts to Christ as possible. The apostle, of course, did not leave us to guess what he meant so beginning in verse 20 he began to explain himself. His first explanation of being subservient to the interest of others is that of being to the Jews what he was not after his conversion that is given in the first sentence of 1 Corinthians 9:20 To the Jews I became like a Jew. So, we ended our study with the question of what the apostle meant to convey in this sentence since he was a Jew. We promised to answer this question in today’s study. Thus, it is with the answer to this question that we begin our study.
Recall that we stated that although the word “Jew” is used in different ways in the NT but in our passage the apostle used it in the sense of a Hebrew person who practices the Mosaic tradition. After the conversion of Apostle Paul, he certainly was no longer a practicing Jew in the sense of reliance on Mosaic tradition as a way of trying to maintain relationship with God or to attain righteousness. So, when he preached to the Jews in Pisidian Antioch, he communicated to them that it is faith in the person of Jesus Christ that brings right standing with God of the type that the Mosaic law could not, as we read in Acts 13:39:
Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses. [Justified here has the sense of “set free.”]
The apostle would certainly have abandoned following the Jewish traditions such as dietary laws as specified in Mosaic law. We say this because it would be difficult for the apostle to maintain such dietary laws and eat with Gentiles that certainly he did during his missionary journeys. Furthermore, he must have been like Peter who also abandoned following dietary laws to eat and mingle with Gentiles for after all, he stated that Jews do not mingle with Gentiles according to Jewish tradition that is not routed entirely in the Scripture, as we read in Acts 10:28:
He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with a Gentile or visit him. But God has shown me that I should not call any man impure or unclean.
Peter by going to the house of Cornelius went against Jewish tradition and so was not acting like a Jew. In fact, he must have also abandoned the Jewish dietary laws to eat with the Gentiles but to please those who came to Antioch from Jerusalem, he abandoned eating with fellow Gentile believers that drew sharp rebuke from Apostle Paul, as recorded in Galatians 2:14:
When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?
If Apostle Peter was no longer following Jewish customs, it follows that Apostle Paul was no longer following them. Thus, when he said that he became a Jew to the Jews, he meant when he was among Jews that are not believers in Christ, he followed the Jewish customs that he did not see as conflicting the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
We have examples of Apostle Paul following Jewish customs that he perceived not to be in conflicting to the gospel message. When the apostle wanted to take Timothy with him as part of his missionary team, he had him circumcised, as we read Acts 16:3:
Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.
Although Timothy was a Gentile because his father was one but because the mother was a Jewess, some Jews would consider him a Jew, so the apostle circumcised him for the benefit of the Jews. By the way that Timothy’s mother was Jewess is stated in Acts 16:1:
He came to Derbe and then to Lystra, where a disciple named Timothy lived, whose mother was a Jewess and a believer, but whose father was a Greek.
Thus, the apostle was not being a hypocrite in circumcising Timothy since he taught that Gentiles needed not to be circumcised which is implied in the relationship of the Gentiles to the Mosaic law as the Holy Spirit gave through the church summarized in Acts 15:28–29:
28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell.
Let us be clear that the apostle only followed Jewish tradition of circumcision when a Jew was involved since there is nothing in the gospel message or in Christian doctrine that says Jews should not be circumcised. The apostle had already taught that believers should not try to alter their circumcision status before salvation as we read in 1 Corinthians 7:18:
Was a man already circumcised when he was called? He should not become uncircumcised. Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised.
As we noted, the Holy Spirit through the church did not forbid naturally born Jews from circumcision and so the apostle was following Jewish tradition in circumcising Timothy because of his mother. However, when it came to Titus who was a Gentile through and through, he did not circumcise him before taking him with him in his missionary journey as he stated in Galatians 2:3:
Yet not even Titus, who was with me, was compelled to be circumcised, even though he was a Greek.
If the apostle had compelled Titus to be circumcised, then he would have been in conflict to what the Holy Spirit gave the Gentile churches about circumcision and what he himself taught. Thus, it was only when the apostle dealt with Jews or one that is considered a half Jew in matter regarding circumcision that he followed the Jewish tradition of circumcision. The point is that the apostle was not being hypocritical in applying the Jewish tradition of circumcision to Timothy before he joined his missionary team.
Another example of Apostle Paul following Jewish tradition, so he was a Jew to the Jews concerned making vows that he participated based on advice of the elders in the church in Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts 21:20–26:
20 When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law. 21 They have been informed that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs. 22 What shall we do? They will certainly hear that you have come, 23 so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow. 24 Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law. 25 As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.” 26 The next day Paul took the men and purified himself along with them. Then he went to the temple to give notice of the date when the days of purification would end and the offering would be made for each of them.
The vow mentioned here is understood as a reference to a Nazirite vow like the one Samson was involved (Judges 13) that a person would vow for a lifelong not to drink wine, not to eat anything unclean and never to cut his hair. Authorities tell us that in later Judaism, the Jewish Law provided for a man to assume a temporary Nazirite vow, which meant that he would live as a Nazirite for a certain length of time, and at the end of that time offer a series of sacrifices. When all of these had been completed, the man shaved his head and burned the hair along with the sacrifice. It is this that the apostle participated since we have a reference of him being involved in similar vow as it is reported in Acts 18:18:
Paul stayed on in Corinth for some time. Then he left the brothers and sailed for Syria, accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila. Before he sailed, he had his hair cut off at Cenchrea because of a vow he had taken.
The apostle followed Jewish tradition in order not to give offense to the Jews because his goal was to lead them to faith in Christ as described in the verbal phrase of 1 Corinthians 9:20 to win the Jews. The word “win” is translated from a Greek word (kerdainō) we encountered in verse 19 that we said is used in that verse in the sense of “to acquire converts” for obedience and faith in the Lord Jesus. It is used in the verbal phrase we are considering in that sense of helping to lead some Jews to faith in Christ, so they would become saved. Hence, the apostle’s purpose of following Jewish tradition when among unbelieving Jews is simply to help them not be turned off from listening to the message of the cross of Christ that he preached. If his hearers were not turned off, some of them would respond to the gospel message and the Lord would save them in which case the apostle would have been an agent of their conversion through the preaching of the gospel. In any event, the apostle’s first explanation of being subservient to the interest of others is that of being to the Jews what he was not after his conversion which is that when he was among Jews that are not believers in Christ he followed the Jewish customs that he did not see as conflicting the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
A second explanation of what Apostle Paul meant by being subservient to the interest of others is that of being to those under that law as one under it as we read in the next clause of 1 Corinthians 9:20 To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law). The problem in this clause is to understand who the apostle had in mind in the phrase To those under the law. Some commentators take the phrase as being parallel to the preceding phrase, that is, To the Jews. While there is a relationship of the present phrase to the previous, it does not seem that the apostle meant to repeat himself without adding something new as such. In effect, what will be the apostle’s point to repeat what he had just written if there is nothing new added? As we identify those the apostle had in mind, we will note that the preceding phrase To the Jews is not quite the same as the phrase To those under the law we are considering although there is an element of similarity between the two. Anyway, to identify those the apostle had in mind, we should understand what the phrase under the law means. To do so, let us consider the words the apostle used.
The word “under” is translated from a Greek preposition (hypo) that may mean “under.” The word “under” could mean “a position below an object or another position” as it is used to describe the placement of all things below Jesus Christ or placing all things under His authority, as we read in Ephesians 1:22:
And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church,
The word “under” may mean “a marker of that which is in a controlling position,” hence may mean “under the control of, under obligation.” It is in this sense of being under the control of sin that the word is used in describing human (Jew or Gentile) relationship to sin in Romans 3:9:
What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.
It is in this sense of being under the control of a person or something that the word is used in our passage of 1 Corinthians 9:20.
The word “law” is translated from a Greek word (nomos) that is used in three ways in the Scripture. It is used for a procedure or practice that has taken hold and so means “a custom, rule, principle, norm, law.” It is in the sense of “principle” that Apostle Paul used it in Romans 7:21:
So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me.
The context of Romans 7:21 indicates that the word “law” refers to “principle” as reflected in the translation of many English versions such as the NASB, the NAB, and many others. The translators of the CEB and the NJB used the word “rule” in place of “law” in their rendering of this passage in Romans 7:21. Another usage of the Greek word translated “law” is for describing the first five books of Moses (i.e., Genesis to Deuteronomy) often known as the Torah, as in John 1:45:
Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”
Still another usage of the Greek word translated “law” is as a reference to the entire OT Scriptures. It is in this sense that the word is used in John 12:34:
The crowd spoke up, “We have heard from the Law that the Christ will remain forever, so how can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this ‘Son of Man’?”
There are at least two passages that the crowd could have referred to, from which they heard about Christ ruling forever. A first passage is Isaiah 9:7:
Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish this.
A second passage is Daniel 7:14:
He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.
Of these three usages, which one applies to our context of 1 Corinthian 9:20? It is in the second meaning that refers to Torah and so refers to Jewish law as contained in the first five books of the OT given by Moses as the system of laws, civil statutes, and priestly ordinances comprising the Mosaic covenant.
Our consideration of the two Greek words used in the phrase under the law enables us to interpret what it means. It means to be under the control of the law/the Torah. Since the apostle was concerned with the gospel message or Christian message, the phrase those under the law refers firstly to believing Jews who believed that salvation in addition to believing in Christ requires observation of the ceremonial aspect of the Mosaic law. The apostle could have been referring to the kind of Jewish believers that taught the necessity of circumcision as we read in Acts 15:1:
Some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brothers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.”
Apparently, the persons that spoke of the necessity of keeping the law during the church council belong to this group as we read in Acts 15:5:
Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses.”
Or the apostle could refer to Jews who believed during his missionary work that were zealous for the law mentioned in the passage we citied previously, that is, in Acts 21:20. Secondly, the phrase those under the law includes Gentiles who have converted to Judaism, or the Proselytes as those Apostle included in his address when he preached in the Jewish synagogue in Pisidian Antioch, as referenced in Acts 13:26:
“Brothers, children of Abraham, and you God-fearing Gentiles, it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent.
Hence, we contend that the phrase those under the law refers to Jews and Proselytes who believed in Christ but felt the necessity of the Gentiles obeying the rituals of Mosaic law for salvation.
The apostle declares what he did about those he described as under the law in the next clause of 1 Corinthians 9:20 I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law). The apostle did not elaborate on how he became or acted like one under the law. The apostle probably had in mind the actions he took that were in keeping with Jewish traditions that we have already cited such as being involved in vows and celebration of the Feast of Unleavened Bread as we may deduce from Acts 20:6:
But we sailed from Philippi after the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and five days later joined the others at Troas, where we stayed seven days.
The law required celebration of the Feast of Unleavened Bread so the apostle might have celebrated it as part of carrying out what is in the law that does not conflict with the message of the gospel since the feast is a reminder to the Jews of their deliverance from physical slavery in Egypt. The apostle recognize that it was not necessary for believers to be judged on matter of celebrations of feasts as in the instruction given in Colossians 2:16:
Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day.
Be that as it may, the apostle participated in activities under the law that he knew were not contrary to the gospel message not because he was obligated to do so but that he willingly did so for a greater good. He knew that such activities would cause some to think that he was under the law but he knew he was only doing such things to enable him accomplish a greater purpose since he was not under the law as in the clause of 1 Corinthians 9:20 though I myself am not under the law. The apostle considered himself no longer under the control of the law as he stated, for example, in Galatians 2:19:
For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God.
When the apostle stated that he died to the law, he meant that the Law was no longer controlling him. Furthermore, he had given up the belief that he could be put right with God through the law, as he testified regarding the righteousness he had through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, as he stated in Philippians 3:9:
and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith.
Of course, the apostle taught that believers controlled by the Holy Spirit are not under the law, according to Galatians 5:18:
But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.
Thus, the apostle knew the truth as it should apply to all believers, but he was involved with activities required in the law that did not conflict with the gospel message he preached. This, again, he did not out of obligation but willingly for the greater good of preaching the gospel.
Anyway, the apostle participated in the activities under the law because he had a greater purpose of helping those who although have believed in Christ but still think that observance of the law is necessary for salvation of Gentiles. It is this purpose that is given in the last clause of 1 Corinthians 9:20 so as to win those under the law. There are two aspects to what the apostle stated as his purpose. The first aspect of the apostle’s purpose is directed to any Jew or Proselyte who believes that salvation is only possible by observing the law. It is possible that the Jews the apostle preached the gospel in Rome during his first trial would belong to the group that believed that keeping the law is necessary for salvation since he used the OT Scripture to prove that Jesus is the Christ as we read in Acts 28:23–24:
23 They arranged to meet Paul on a certain day, and came in even larger numbers to the place where he was staying. From morning till evening he explained and declared to them the kingdom of God and tried to convince them about Jesus from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets. 24 Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe.
The second aspect of the apostle’s purpose was directed towards the Jews who have believed but insist that the law is necessary for salvation hence their push for the Gentiles to observe the law. Or Jewish believers who practice Mosaic tradition. The apostle participated in those activities that were in the law that did not contradict the gospel he preached so that he would have the opportunity to correct any misconception. Those who accept his correction would have been won or converted to the position that there is nothing to be added to the gospel message that required that salvation be only through faith in Jesus Christ.
Apostle Paul’s approach directed to those who are under the law is one that we should adopt. We should know how to go along with believers who are not well informed in the Scripture so that we will get the opportunity to correct them. When we say we should know how to go along with believers that are not well informed in the Scripture, we do not mean that we do anything that is contrary to the Scripture since the apostle did not do anything that is contrary to the gospel message he preached. What we mean is that we should accommodate such Christians in things that are not sinful so that we eventually may correct them. Take for example, suppose you are invited to meal by a believer who believes in the dietary laws given in OT Scripture and informs you that he/she does. You should not argue with such a person but accept the invitation with the goal that you would after eating bring up the topic of dietary laws because you want to help that believer to recognize that such is not essential in the Christian faith. This, you would do by pointing to that individual that there is no food that is unclean since the Holy Spirit has stated so through the commentary on the teaching of the Lord Jesus as we read in Mark 7:19:
For it doesn’t go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods “clean.”)
You follow up this passage by the declaration of the Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul that indicates that all foods are clean in Romans 14:14:
As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean.
Then you give the believer the correct perspective that no believer should judge another for what they eat or do not eat as the Holy Spirit stated through the apostle in Romans 14:2–3:
2 One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3 The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him.
Hopefully, with these passages you would give such believer correct perspective regarding dietary laws of the OT Scripture. The point is that we should be careful that we do not do anything that may hinder us from helping a fellow believer who is misguided on doctrine or the unbeliever who thinks that the individual can earn salvation.
A third explanation of what Apostle Paul meant by being subservient to the interest of others is that of being to those that are outside the law as one without the law as we read in the first clause of 1 Corinthians 9:21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law).
Who are those the apostle meant in the verbal phrase those not having the law? The answer lies with the Greek word used. The expression “not having the law” is translated from a Greek word (anomos) that as an adjective may be used to describe those who are outside Israelite legal tradition and act contrary to its moral standards although the translators of the NIV used the meaning “wicked” to translate it with a foot note that reads “of those not having the law (that is, Gentiles)” as we read in Acts 2:23:
This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
The footnote of the NIV indicates that the word may be used to describe Gentiles as those who do not know the Mosaic law. The word may mean “lawbreakers” as it is used by the apostle to describe those to whom law applies in 1 Timothy 1:9:
We also know that law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers,
The word may mean “lawless” as it pertains to violating moral standards as Apostle Peter used it to describe the activities of the contemporaries of Lot in Sodom in 2 Peter 2:8:
(for that righteous man, living among them day after day, was tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard)—
In our passage of 1 Corinthians 9:21, it is used with the meaning of “outside law, without law” in the sense not being subject to the Mosaic law. Hence, the verbal phrase those not having the law the apostle used refers to Gentiles as those without God’s revealed law.
Our interpretation that the verbal phrase those not having the law the apostle used refers to Gentiles enables us to understand what the apostle meant in the clause of 1 Corinthians 9:21 I became like one not having the law. The apostle meant that he conducted himself whenever among the Gentiles as if he were a Gentile by not following the ceremonial aspects of the Mosaic law. This would imply that he would, for example, eat whatever the Gentiles presented to him without any qualms regarding meeting the Jewish dietary law. We assert this because, as we have stated previously, Apostle Peter initially ate with Gentiles without any qualms until he wanted to please some of those in Jerusalem as recorded in the passage we cited previously, that is, Galatians 2:12:
Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group.
Paul ate with Gentiles otherwise he would not have rebuked. In addition, the apostle associated with Gentile believers without insisting on circumcision as those under the Law would. It is for this reason that he never circumcised Titus when he became a member of his missionary team.
Gentiles were regarded by the Jews, and rightly so, as those who lived contrary to the moral requirements of the Mosaic Law. It is for this reason the apostle taught Gentiles who became believers in Christ to abandon the lifestyle that contradicts God’s word, as stated in Ephesians 4:17:
I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking.
Because the apostle recognized that Gentiles were those who lived contrary to the moral codes of the Mosaic Law, it was necessary for him to qualify what he meant by living like a Gentile or those without the law. This he did in the clause of 1 Corinthians 9:21 though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law. Literally, the Greek reads not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ. This is in part because the phrase “under … law” of the NIV is translated from a Greek word (ennomos) that as an adjective is used only twice in the Greek NT. In its other usage, it means “legal” as it is used to describe an authorized assembly of people in Ephesus in Acts 19:39:
If there is anything further you want to bring up, it must be settled in a legal assembly.
In its other usage in our passage of study 1 Corinthians 9:21, it means “in law” that is, being subject to a law or a system of laws (as opposed to being without any laws).
In any case, the apostle made clear that his living like a Gentile does not mean he lives contrary to God’s law as indicated in the NIV with the sentence though I am not free from God’s law or literally not being outside the law of God.
What does the apostle mean in the phrase God’s law? To begin with, the phrase should be fully expounded to read “law that is derived from God.” This expanded translation will be helpful in interpreting the phrase. The phrase God’s law in 1 Corinthians 9:21 appears three other times in the NIV in Apostle Paul’s epistle to the Romans with two possible interpretations. The phrase is used twice in the seventh chapter of Romans, that is, Romans 7:22, 25:
22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law;
25 Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.
In these two verses, the phrase God’s law is a reference to the system of moral principles that are summarized in the Ten Commandments, and which for the believer becomes the ruling principle for expressing his/her gratitude to the Lord, though not a means of salvation or the objective moral law, whether written or unwritten. The third usage of the phrase God’s law is in Romans 8:7:
the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so.
Although in this passage, some take the phrase as a reference to the law of Moses, but it is more generally accepted that it refers to God’s righteous demands and so not limited to Jewish law. Of the two interpretations, it is the first interpretation that takes the phrase God’s law as a reference to moral principles contained in the Mosaic law that is applicable to the usage of the phrase in our passage of 1 Corinthians 9:21. Consequently, when Paul stated I am not free from God’s law he meant that while living like Gentiles whenever he was among them, he did not violate God’s moral principles delineated in the Mosaic Law.
The sentence though I am not free from God’s law may appear contradictory to the fact the apostle said he was not under the law, in the sense of being controlled by the law, as for example, in his rhetorical question in Romans 6:15:
What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!
Furthermore, we have also noted that the apostle indicated that those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit, as himself, are not under the law in the sense of being controlled by the law. This apparent contradiction is then clarified by the law that the apostle and so all believers are under. The law that the apostle was under that is applicable to all believers is given in the verbal phrase of 1 Corinthians 9:21 but am under Christ’s law.
What is Christ’s law? This question is important because the equivalent phrase of Christ’s law which is law of Christ appears in Galatians 6:2:
Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.
Several interpretations have been given in this context for the phrase the law of Christ. That notwithstanding, it is our interpretation that the phrase is a reference to the command to love one another, as our Lord instructed in John 13:34-35:
34 "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."
There are two reasons for this interpretation. First, the apostle had mentioned love in the context of Galatians 5 as a means of fulfilling the Law in Galatians 5:13–14:
13 You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 14 The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
Second, there is a definite article before the word “law” in the Greek indicating that the apostle had a specific instruction in his mind related to Christ. Although the context of the phrase the law of Christ in Galatians 6:2 is different from the equivalent phrase Christ’s law in 1 Corinthians 9:21, it is probably the case that the apostle was thinking of the command of Christ to love one another since he had elsewhere indicated that love is the summary of the law in Romans 13:8–10:
8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, “Do not commit adultery,” “Do not murder,” “Do not steal,” “Do not covet,” and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
It is our interpretation that when the apostle wrote in 1 Corinthians 9:21 but am under Christ’s law he meant he was governed by the command to love others as Christ commanded and so he was not living contrary to God’s moral law as delineated in the Mosaic law. Of course, the question is, why then did the apostle not state plainly that he was obeying the moral law of God? There are at least two possible reasons the apostle would have used the phrase Christ’s law instead of God’s law. First, it is his way of conveying the deity of Christ. For if a person takes the law as a reference to the moral codes of the Mosaic law that are fulfilled by obeying Christ’s command to love others then that person would understand that Christ is also the source of the moral codes of the Mosaic law which will speak to the deity of Christ as the source of the law. By the way, the apostle probably used the word Christ that means “the Anointed One” to help us recognize that he was thinking of the deity of Christ. Secondly, the apostle used the phrase Christ’s law to convey that he was being obedient to Christ in that he obeyed Him by operating in love as he preached to the various groups of people. He wanted the Corinthians to recognize that his accommodating the various groups he preached is out of love. This should remind them of what the apostle already stated about the importance of love in interacting with others as he alluded in 1 Corinthians 8:1:
Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.
The point is that the apostle would have been thinking of the command to love since he had already stated how love builds up people. Therefore, he wanted the Corinthians to know that he was governed by love as commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ in his ministry of the word.
In any case, the apostle states the reason he operated as though he was without law when interacting with those who did not have the Mosaic Law, that is, Gentiles. The purpose was to lead them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. It is this that is given in the last clause of 1 Corinthians 9:21 so as to win those not having the law. Again, the word “win” is translated from a Greek word (kerdainō) that here has the sense of “to acquire converts,” that is, to acquire subjects for obedience and faith in Jesus. The apostle keeps repeating his purpose of adaptation to the various groups he preached the gospel. He did this to remind us that we should be governed by love to reach others for Christ so that we should adapt to varying conditions to ensure we reach others with the gospel. This reminds us of the message of the section we are considering which is You should do everything that is lawful to advance God’s word.
02/26//21