In 1 Corinthians 9, we get a unique and especially illuminating glimpse into Paul’s ministry strategy, particularly the way he relates to those whom he evangelizes, disciples, and pastors. The discussion commences somewhat abruptly at the beginning of the chapter:

1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord? 2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.

We are only two verses into the passage and we can already see that Paul is on the defensive. In fact, he tells us as much in verse 3: “This is my defense to those who would examine me.” Clearly Paul is aware that some of the Corinthians had been critical of him, particularly the way he conducts his ministry. After all, while some had voiced support of his leadership (“I am of Paul,” 1:12), we know that others had expressed reservations about him, preferring the teaching ability of Apollos (“I am of Apollos”) and perhaps the leadership style of other early Christian authority figures, such as Peter (“I am of Cephas”). Paul is entirely against partisanship within the church, yet Paul remains generally unfazed by such negative evaluations of his own ministry methods; hence, he remarks that “it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you. . . . It is the Lord who judges me” (4:3–4). Even so, by the time we reach chapter 9, Paul feels the need to provide a lengthy defense of his apostolic authority (“Am I not an apostle?”) so that he and the church can get on the same page about why he leads and ministers the way he does.

It isn’t likely by this point in his relationship with the Corinthians that the church was fully doubting Paul’s apostolic credentials (though perhaps by the time he wrote 2 Corinthians some in the congregation had grown quite skeptical of him). What Paul is addressing here is whether, as an apostle, he was operating in a manner worthy of his calling. Throughout the chapter, Paul seeks to defend himself against the charge that his decision to ply a trade, specifically as a “tentmaker” (Acts 18:3), during his initial visit to Corinth demonstrates that he lacks an appropriate apostolic ethos. “If Paul were really an apostle deserving of our admiration,” some of the Corinthians may have contemplated, “then he would not have had to work with his hands in the marketplace night and day just to support himself financially.”

On the one hand, those who thought such things were correct: Paul did not have to ply a trade to make ends meet. This is why, between 9:4 and 9:14, Paul asks thirteen rhetorical questions in order to stablish his “right” to receive an apostolic wage. For not only do apostles have “the right to eat and drink” (9:4); they also have the right to take along (and financially support) a believing wife (9:5–6). And it is not only apostles who have the right to benefit directly from their own labor; so do soldiers, farmers, shepherds, and temple workers (9:7, 13). Beyond that, the Law of Moses also establishes a principle that would afford apostles the right to material support (9:8–11; cf. Deut 25:4). Finally, even Jesus himself “commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel” (9:14; cf. Matt 10:10//Luke 10:7).

Yet despite possessing this “right” to be financially supported in exchange for preaching the gospel, Paul opted not to accept any handouts from the Corinthians (9:12, 15). Why? The rationale Paul provides is striking in its missional focus: Paul refuses to make use of his right to receive an apostolic wage because he would rather “endure anything [even life as a tentmaker] rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ” (9:12). How might accepting financial support from the Corinthians have put an obstacle in the way of the gospel? The answer seems clear. Money, back then just as now, was a touchy subject. Thus, accepting a wage from the Corinthians while ministering among them had the potential to compromise Paul’s credibility in the eyes of some, especially the poor and impoverished in Corinth, those whom Paul later in the passage calls “the weak” (9:22). And as it turns out, this manner of accommodating to the needs of others was characteristic of Paul’s entire approach to ministry, especially the cross-cultural missionary work in which he was routinely engaged.

As the passage goes on, Paul introduces us to a more abstract presentation of his missional strategy. The most illuminating part appears in 9:19–23:

19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.

“Paul’s missional strategy is somewhat chameleon-like, insofar as he adapts to various groups as the need arises.”

In this paragraph, Paul lays out a ministry approach that not only explains why he labored in Corinth as an artisan, but also why he ministers in such an accommodating manner when ministering cross-culturally. In brief, Paul’s missional strategy is somewhat chameleon-like, insofar as he adapts to various groups as the need arises.

“He does what he needs in order not to put an obstacle in the way of the gospel.”

On the face of it, Paul’s rationalization for this adaptive and accommodating approach to ministry suggests that it is somewhat pragmatically motivated—he becomes “all things to all people, that by all means [he] might save some” (9:22). In other words, as he said earlier in verse 12, he does what he needs in order not to put an obstacle in the way of the gospel. Therefore, when he is ministering to Jews, he becomes “as a Jew” by faithfully observing the Jewish customs outlined in the Mosaic Law (9:20). The same is true when he ministers to a mixed ethnic audience which likewise is committed to living “under the law” of Moses, whether Gentile converts to Judaism, Jewish sympathizers (e.g., “God fearers,” Acts 10:2, 22; 13:6, 26), etc.: he observes the law’s demands in order that the gospel might reach that community without his target audience having to overcome any unnecessary religious-cultural obstruction (9:20). When it comes to ministering to those without the law (i.e., typical Gentiles), however, Paul becomes like them in precisely the manner that would have shocked Paul’s Jewish contemporaries—that is, Paul, the Jewish believer in Jesus, became like the Gentiles in their non-observance of the law. This, of course, is important, because if Paul is living according to the law while ministering to Gentiles who do not even have the law, then he would not have been able to share meals with them, given the law’s regulatory principles about clean and unclean food (cf. Lev 11:1–47; 20:22–26). So, for a Jewish believer in Jesus such as Paul, accommodating to those without the law may have required his abstention from various Jewish practices that he would have normally been committed to observing.

We clearly see Paul’s missiological heart in this passage and can’t help but to appreciate his selflessness and unrelenting drive to get people into the kingdom of heaven! However, there seems to have been more of a theological motivation for his particular ministry strategy than he states on the surface. As many commentators have noticed, there are close affinities between Paul’s presentation of his assimilating approach to ministry here and the way he portrays Jesus elsewhere. In Philippians 2:5–8, Paul says,

5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.

When we compare Paul’s adaptive approach to ministry in 1 Corinthians 9:19–23 to Jesus’ condescension to humanity in Philippians 2:5–8, we see a number of striking similarities. When Paul explains that Jesus “[took] the form of a servant” (Phil 2:7), Paul is metaphorically portraying Christ’s self-imposed emptying (“emptied himself,” Phil 2:7) and self-imposed humiliation (“humbled himself,” Phil 2:8) in words akin to the way Paul presents his own self-imposed service (“made myself a servant,” 1 Cor 9:19). Beyond that, Christ’s servanthood metaphorically alludes to the reality that he was “born in the likeness of men [literally, ‘the likeness of humans’]” (Phil 2:6). In other words, Christ’s servanthood came to expression not only in his death but also in his life—that is, in the event of the incarnation. This isn’t to take anything from Christ’s perfect obedience, his substitutionary death, or his life-giving resurrection. But while each of those phases of Christ’s human experience certainly holds a critical place of importance in Paul’s understanding of how God has achieved salvation for his creation (hence, “even death on a cross,” Phil 2:8), the image Paul uses in Philippians 2:7 of Christ becoming servant-like primarily refers to the incarnation. Such an event required the pre-incarnate Jesus temporarily to lay aside his rightful claim to heavenly rule and transcendence, and instead to undergo a radical transformation—though being God himself, he took on human nature by being “born of a woman, born under the law” (Gal 4:4).

Comparing 1 Corinthians 9:19–23 to Philippians 2:5–8 should help us to see that Paul’s self-enslavement through his becoming “all things to all people” is modeled on Jesus’ own self-enslavement when he became human for the sake of all humanity. Paul’s own ministry approach, then, as flexible as it was depending on the specific needs of his varied demographic targets, was undertaken in the likeness of the Lord Jesus whose very life has become the paradigm for those whom he calls to follow him.

“Paul’s accommodating approach to ministry was also deeply motivated by and modeled on Jesus’ own example of sacrificial love and self-surrender.”

In sum, Paul is not merely a pragmatist who wishes to remove cultural or financial barriers between the gospel and those who need to receive it. Removing obstacles is a wise and important step in our evangelism and discipleship efforts, but Paul’s accommodating approach to ministry was also deeply motivated by and modeled on Jesus’ own example of sacrificial love and self-surrender. Just as Jesus’ mission to humanity required his assimilation to those he sought to save, so Paul’s mission to Jews, Gentiles, and the weak necessitated that he, too, become like each of those groups in order that he might “win” them to the Lord. Such an “incarnational ethic” was not intended for Paul alone. Let us seek to imitate Paul as he imitates Christ by embodying such sacrificial love and sacrifice as we seek to reach and teach those God has placed in our lives (1 Cor 11:1).

All Things to All People: Imitating the Incarnation of Jesus in Our Ministry Settings

Dr. John K. Goodrich

Dean of Academics and Professor of Biblical Studies

All Things to All People: Imitating the Incarnation of Jesus in Our Ministry Settings

Dr. John K. Goodrich

Dean of Academics and Professor of Biblical Studies

The Resurrection: The Defining Moment of History