In our study so far, we have established the theological warrant for engaging with Stoicism: the doctrine of Common Grace. We have argued that we should “plunder the Egyptians,” taking the gold of pagan insight and refining it in the fire of Scripture. We saw the Apostle Paul model this generally on Mars Hill in Acts 17.
Now, we turn to a specific, concrete example of this method in action. We do not need to guess if Paul was familiar with Stoic categories; his letters prove it. Nowhere is this clearer than in his treatment of adiaphora—”things indifferent.”
This concept was the bread and butter of the Stoic ethical system. Yet, when Paul addresses the divisive issues of meat and holy days in Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8, he effectively walks into the Stoic lecture hall, picks up this technical term, and carries it into the Church. But—and this is crucial—he does not leave it unchanged. He baptizes it. He takes a concept designed for individual isolation and transforms it into a tool for corporate unity.
Paul’s doctrine of Christian liberty regarding adiaphora, or “things indifferent,” strategically appropriates the Stoic category but radically re-centers it on the law of love for one’s neighbor and the glory of God, transforming a philosophical concept of personal detachment into a theological principle of corporate edification.
The Stoic Category: Preferred Indifferents
To appreciate Paul’s brilliance, we must first understand the raw material he was working with. As we saw in our discussion of Virtue (Article 10), the Stoics divided all of human existence into three categories:
- Virtue (Good): Wisdom, Justice, Courage, Temperance. These always contribute to happiness.
- Vice (Bad): Folly, Injustice, Cowardice, Intemperance. These always contribute to misery.
- Indifferents (Adiaphora): Everything else. Life, death, health, sickness, wealth, poverty, beauty, ugliness.
For the Stoic, these “indifferents” were morally neutral. They could not make you a better or worse person. However, the Stoics were not nihilists; they recognized that some indifferents were naturally better than others. They called these “Preferred Indifferents” (proegmena).
- It is “preferred” to be healthy rather than sick, but health does not make you righteous.
- It is “preferred” to be wealthy rather than poor, but wealth does not make you virtuous.
The Stoic Sage navigates these choices with cool detachment. He selects the preferred option when reasonable, but if Fate takes it away, his happiness remains untouched. The focus is entirely vertical (Me vs. Nature) and internal (My Tranquility).
Paul’s Appropriation: “Food Will Not Commend Us”
When Paul writes to the Corinthians, he steps right into this framework. The church was torn over “meat sacrificed to idols.” One faction (likely the wealthier, more educated Gentile converts) argued, “We have knowledge. An idol is nothing. Meat is just meat. It is a matter of indifference.”
Sound familiar? This is Stoic logic applied to Christian theology.
And Paul agrees with their premise. He validates the category of adiaphora.
- “Food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do” (1 Cor. 8:8).
- “I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself” (Rom. 14:14).
Paul affirms the “gold” of the Stoic insight: External objects are morally neutral. Holiness is not a matter of diet or geography. In doing so, he liberates the Christian conscience from legalism and superstition. He affirms that the Christian man is the freest man on earth, Lord of all, subject to none.
The Christian Pivot: From Autonomy to Edification
But just as the “strong” Corinthians are high-fiving each other for their philosophical sophistication, Paul pivots. He takes the Stoic concept of adiaphora and turns it inside out.
The Stoic asks: “Does eating this meat hurt my virtue?”
Answer: No. Therefore, I am free to eat.
Paul asks: “Does eating this meat hurt my brother?”
Answer: Yes. Therefore, I will never eat meat again (1 Cor. 8:13).
This is the radical Christian difference.
- Stoic Adiaphora: Focused on the Self. “I am indifferent to the meat, so I am strong.”
- Christian Adiaphora: Focused on the Neighbor. “I am indifferent to the meat, so I can give it up for you.”
Paul introduces a new variable that the Stoic equation could not account for: The Weaker Brother.
In Stoicism, the “weak” man is simply foolish; the Sage ignores his opinions. In Christianity, the “weak” man is a brother “for whom Christ died” (1 Cor. 8:11). To wound his conscience is not just an annoyance; it is a sin against Christ.
The Redeemed Conscience: Wisdom and Prudence
So, how does the Christian Stoic navigate these “gray areas” today—alcohol, entertainment, politics, education choices? We do not rely on a list of rules (legalism), nor do we rely on “doing whatever we want” (license). We rely on the redeemed Conscience, informed by Wisdom and Prudence.
We ask three questions that move from the Stoic “is” to the Christian “ought”:
- The Stoic Question (Lawfulness): “Is this action inherently sinful?”
- If yes (e.g., adultery), it is forbidden.
- If no (e.g., drinking wine), it is adiaphora.
- The Wisdom Question (Expediency): “Is this action ‘preferred’ for my sanctification?”
- “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful” (1 Cor. 6:12).
- Drinking may be lawful, but if I am prone to excess, Wisdom dictates I treat it as a “dispreferred indifferent.” I avoid it not because it is evil, but because it hinders my race.
- The Love Question (Edification): “Will this action build up or tear down my neighbor?”
- “All things are lawful, but not all things build up” (1 Cor. 10:23).
- If my liberty becomes a stumbling block, Love commands me to holster my liberty.
Conclusion: The Ultimate Freedom
This is where Christian Stoicism shines. The pagan Stoic is free because he doesn’t care about things. The Christian Stoic is free because he cares about people more than things.
We use the Stoic category of “indifference” to detach our hearts from the world (we don’t need the meat/wine/entertainment to be happy). But we use that very detachment to serve our neighbor. Because I don’t need the wine, I am free to abstain from it to help a recovering brother.
My indifference to the thing empowers my love for the person.
This is the “plundering of the Egyptians” at its finest. We take a tool designed for self-sufficiency and forge it into a tool for self-sacrifice. We act not merely as rational Sages, but as sons of the Father, walking in the footsteps of the One who did not please Himself (Rom. 15:3).
In our next article, we must face a necessary rejection. We have seen what we can keep (Virtue, Duty, Adiaphora). Now we must look at what we must burn. We turn to the Stoic conception of God and the necessary rejection of the Impersonal Logos.
Key Terms
- Adiaphora: (Greek, “indifferent things”). In Stoic ethics, things that are outside the realm of moral virtue or vice (e.g., wealth, health). In Christian theology, things that are neither commanded nor forbidden by Scripture (e.g., food, drink, dress).
- Preferred Indifferents (Proegmena): Things that are not virtues but are naturally in accordance with our design (e.g., health), and thus properly selected if possible, provided they do not conflict with virtue.
- Christian Liberty: The freedom of the Christian conscience from the commandments of men in matters of faith and worship, and the freedom to enjoy God’s good creation in matters adiaphora, always bounded by the moral law and the law of love.
- The Weaker Brother: A fellow believer whose conscience is overly sensitive or uninformed, leading them to view a matter of adiaphora as sinful. The “strong” are called to bear with the weak and not cause them to stumble.