Original Meaning
VERSES 17–24 FORM a preliminary summary of Paul’s argument in chapter 7 thus far and apply it to two analogous situations. If this chapter does form an ABA pattern (see p. 132), then this paragraph provides not only a summary but also the central focus (part B) of his argument. The main point is stated at the beginning (v. 17), middle (v. 20), and end (v. 24) of the paragraph and can be paraphrased as, “Do not be in a hurry to change the external circumstances of your life simply because you have become a Christian.”
“Retain” (v. 17) is “walk about.” “The place in life that the Lord assigned” refers to one’s marital, socioeconomic, or physical circumstances. “To which God has called him,” is a misleading translation; the Greek actually reads, “as God called him.” In other words, the entire verse implies that in whatever state we are when we come to the Lord, we should function faithfully in that state without immediately seeking to change it.
Verses 18–19 illustrate this principle with the example of circumcision versus uncircumcision. Judaizers sought to force Gentile Christians to be circumcised (Acts 15:1), while many Jews who sought acceptance in the Greco-Roman world underwent a minor surgical procedure to make them selves appear to be uncircumcised.1 Although it was one of the most fundamental ritual requirements of Judaism, circumcision is now a matter of moral indifference for believers (cf. Acts 15:1–21). The New Testament counterpart to circumcision is salvation, symbolized by baptism (Col. 2:11–15).
“Keeping God’s commandments” (v. 19) for Christians does not mean observing all 613 pieces of Mosaic legislation, at least not literally, though all do have relevance in one way or another for believers (2 Tim. 3:16). Rather Paul refers to the reinterpretations and applications of the Law for a new age, in light of the words and works of Jesus and the apostles.2
Verses 21–23 give a second illustration of the theme “remain as you are.” Here Paul contrasts the experiences of Roman slaves and freedmen. Neither state makes serving the Lord inherently easier than the other, and there are spiritual senses in which literal slaves are free in Christ and literal freedmen slaves to Christ. Yet Paul does add an exception here which he did not in the case of circumcision: “If you can gain your freedom, do so.”3 Physical slavery is a form of oppression that displeases God, so when an opportunity for freedom arises, it should be seized.
It is worth recalling that slavery in ancient Rome did not always resemble the institution we know from the history of the Southern United States in the 1800s. To be sure there were cruel masters, but at times some slaves lived more like the indentured servants of wealthy families in medieval Europe. Others were government officials, teachers, traders, or artists. Unlike slaves in the American South, many were able to buy their own freedom; and many who could, chose not to, preferring instead the security of their patrons to the vagaries of freedom.4 Still, Paul knows that owning humans as property fundamentally contradicts their status in Christ (cf. Philem. 10–16), and he reminds all believers not to revert to physical or spiritual slavery, from which Christ’s atonement was intended to save them (v. 23).
Bridging Contexts
IN GENERALIZING BEYOND the specific issues of sex and marriage, Paul indicates that we ought to range quite broadly in looking for applications of verses 17–24. The proverb, “Bloom where you are planted” can fit into a wide variety of contexts. Again, we must admire Paul’s pastoral flexibility in relating to a host of people in different situations in life and in minimizing the status symbols that the society around him overly stressed.
Verse 21b (“If you can gain your freedom, do so”) indicates that the call to remain as you are in verses 17, 20 and 24 may not be absolutized. But, as throughout the entire chapter, Paul is trying to discourage new Christians from taking sudden, drastic actions to change their lives, as if altering their external circumstances were the key to pleasing God. Acts 16:3 reminds us that Paul felt free to circumcise Timothy, a half-Jew, to keep from offending his contemporaries in his outreach to the Jewish community. But when Judaizers insisted on imposing their agenda as a prerequisite for salvation, Paul stood firmly against them (Acts 15:1; Gal. 2:11–14).
Verse 19 here would have stood out so starkly for anyone from a Jewish background (surely circumcision was one of the central commandments of God!), that it highlights just how far removed from Judaizing Paul is. While we must not lose sight of the presence of moral absolutes in Paul, his understanding of God’s will is fundamentally rooted in the Spirit’s guidance, not the letter of externally imposed laws (cf. esp. 2 Cor. 3:6–18).5
Verse 21 has a long history of abuse by pro-slavery advocates.6 Parallels are often drawn with Colossians 3:22–25 and Ephesians 6:5–8. If Paul were pro-abolition, why did he not come out and say so more directly? Part of the answer is because he, like Jesus, was concerned primarily with fashioning a countercultural community of disciples who did not directly challenge the state but modeled better lifestyles for a watching world. Another part of the answer is probably because Christianity was such a tiny institution and slavery such a big one in the ancient Roman empire. Attempts to oppose slavery in more wholesale fashion would have proved so counterproductive as to threaten Christianity’s very existence. But Paul sowed the seeds for a revolutionary alternative in Christ which in time could only but threaten social institutions of oppression.7
It is significant that throughout history, antislavery movements have often received their greatest impetus from Christians, even though the Bible takes only a low-key position against such mistreatment of human beings, and even though certain wings of the church have often impeded emancipation as well.8 At the most fundamental level, however, Scripture’s cautious approach stems from the fact that spiritual rather than physical freedom is what ultimately determines how a person will live in the age to come, a life that makes the circumstances of this age pale into insignificance by comparison (2 Cor. 4:17; Rom. 8:18). From Philippians 4:10–19, we may also apply these principles to the level of wealth or poverty in which we find ourselves.
The example of slavery versus freedom actually corresponds to the questions about celibacy versus marriage more closely than does circumcision versus uncircumcision. For the former two are matters of fundamental morality, and Paul does indicate that under certain circumstances one state is preferable to the other. But all three contrasts reinforce Paul’s central theme that “status of any kind is ultimately irrelevant with God.” Instead, “precisely because our lives are determined by God’s call, not by our situation, we must learn to continue there as those who are ‘before God’ … and let the call of God sanctify to oneself the situation, whether it be mixed marriage, singleness, blue-or white-collar work, or socioeconomic condition.”9
Contemporary Significance
SNYDER SUCCINCTLY SUMMARIZES the central tension we experience in trying to apply this passage to modern society: “Paul’s thought stands in sharp contrast to the autonomous thinking of the western world. For Paul there is no freedom except in peace with one’s social network.”10
These verses directly challenge our contemporary individualism, which teaches people never to rest content with the status they have already attained but always to seek more money, power, influence, and control over their lives. The results include a highly transient, upwardly mobile population, among the more affluent, who generally fail to notice that the numbers of poor and dispossessed often grow precisely as they climb their ladders and push others down.
The opposite danger is passivity. Verse 21a encourages us to try to improve our lot in this world, so long as we do not do it at others’ expense or imagine that the key to happiness and a rewarding Christian life demands change in our current status. Certainly we must avoid the tendency to suggest to new Christians that leaving a secular job for full-time Christian work is somehow by definition the desirable thing to do.
About the only jobs that Christians cannot honorably and productively continue in after conversion are those which are inherently immoral—prostitution, pimping, racketeering, organized crime, drug dealing, and the like. Of course, there are some which are border-line, for example, operating a gambling casino or manufacturing nuclear weapons. Christians will continue to disagree on what to do about such jobs, and it is not clear that Paul’s teaching here will end those debates.
On the other hand, it is entirely appropriate for Christians to seek to liberate others from oppressive social institutions in the name of Christ, so long as they do not transform the gospel into one that is exclusively this-worldly in focus. Here lie the errors of certain branches of radical liberationist theologies. But the errors of extremists do not invalidate the causes they support.11 Slavery still does exist in parts of the Third World and is even experiencing a resurgence in other places, particularly as young women are sold into prostitution. Addictions to alcohol, drugs, sex, even religion, keep many Westerners in their grip. More subtle idolatries and ideologies captivate even greater numbers. Against all of these, Paul’s words ring true even today: “You were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men” (v. 23). And people suffering under oppressive governments and impoverished by unjust economic structures need to hear that the gospel holds out hope for their physical as well as spiritual circumstances. But Christians who struggle to liberate them may need to work slowly, “over the long haul,” rather than attempting the kind of violent intervention that may actually prove counterproductive to their efforts.12