So let no one boast about human beings, since everything belongs to you, whether Paul, Apollos, Cephas, the world, life, death, the present, or the future—everything belongs to you, (1Co 3:21-22 ISV)
The New International Commentary on the New Testament makes a beautiful summation of these words of Paul to the Corinthians. I was so moved by the concluding thought I felt a desire to share with everyone.:
“So what is the problem addressed here? A careful reading of the whole indicates that at least four issues are involved:
(1) There is “quarreling” and “divisiveness” among them, with their various teachers as rallying points.
(2) This quarreling is in some way being carried on in the name of “wisdom.”
(3) Related to these first two items are the repeated references to the Corinthians’ “boasting” (1Co_1:29-31; 1Co_3:21; 1Co_4:7) and being “puffed up” (1Co_4:6, 1Co_4:18-19). Their quarrels took the form of boasting in mere humans, apparently in the name of wisdom (1Co_3:18-21; cf. 1Co_4:6). The problem, however, probably goes much deeper than that. As Munck observed: “Their view of Christian leaders as teachers of wisdom really ministers to their own exaltation. It is true that they boast about these great names, but only to boast about themselves.”
(4) Apart from the personal application to himself and Apollos in the middle (1Co_3:5-23) the rest of the response has a decidedly apologetic ring to it, in which Paul is defending not only his own past ministry among them (1Co_1:16-17; 2:1-3:4), but also his present relationship to them, since he is being “judged” by them (1Co_4:1-21). Given the express statement toward the end (1Co_4:18) that some are “puffed up” against Paul, plus the earlier indication (1Co_4:6) that some are “puffed up” for one (apparently Apollos in this case), against the other (probably Paul), it seems altogether likely that the quarreling over their leaders is not just for Apollos or Cephas, but is decidedly over against Paul at the same time. Within this kind of context they were quarreling over their leaders as teachers of wisdom, boasting in one or the other, and judging them from this merely human perspective, from which perspective neither Paul nor his gospel comes off very well.
In light of all that has been said—about the power of God’s wisdom in the cross, about servant leadership that reflects the character of the cross, about God’s contempt for the futility of worldly wisdom—in light of all that, let no one among you still be bold enough to say “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos.” That is to ground one’s confidence in the creature, mere mortals all. Rather, Paul will now direct their focus one final time to the Creator, who is God over all. 1Co_3:21-22
“All things are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God.” With these words Paul completely transforms their slogans. They say (lit.), “I am of Paul, etc.” With the analogy of the field (1Co_3:5-9) Paul changed that to “you are of God.” Now he makes the further transformation, “All things are of you, including Paul, Apollos, and Cephas.” This turns their slogans completely on their head, with the significant difference that the pronoun is plural, not singular. Thus, they may not say “I belong to Paul or Apollos or Cephas,” not only because that is to boast in mere humans, but because that is the precise opposite of reality in Christ. In him, as Paul will later say in lofty cadences, God has already begun what will eventually be brought to full consummation, namely “all things in heaven and earth under one head, even Christ” (Eph_1:10); therefore, Paul can affirm that presently, all things are yours (plural).
The list of “all things” begins with the three men (Paul, Apollos, Cephas mentioned early on (1Co_1:12), around whose names the Corinthians are clustering in some form of jealousy and strife (1Co_3:3). This of course is the point of everything. One is therefore not quite prepared for the sudden expansion of the list, which really does include all things. One wonders whether Paul himself had all this in mind when the sentence began. Nonetheless it is altogether true to his theology.
These five items, “the world, life, death, the present, and the future,” are the ultimate tyrannies of human existence, to which people are in lifelong bondage as slaves. For Paul the death and resurrection of Jesus marked the turning of the ages in such a way that nothing lies outside Christ’s jurisdiction. In the form of the cross God has planted his flag on planet Earth and marked it off as his own possession; hence the “world” is his. So also with the whole of existence (“life” and “death”), which are immediately placed into eschatological perspective (“the present and the future”). Because in Christ Jesus both “life” itself and therefore “the future” are ours, “death” is ours as well, as is “the present.” We die, but “life” cannot be taken from us; we live the life of the future in the present age, and therefore the present has become our own possession. For those in Christ Jesus, what things were formerly tyrannies are now their new birthright. This is the glorious freedom of the children of God. They are free lords of all things, not bound to the whims of chance or the exigencies of life and death. The future is no cause for panic; it is already theirs. In light of such expansive realities, how can the Corinthians say, “I am of Paul, or Apollos”? That is too narrow, too constricted a view. Apollos—and Paul, and Peter, and the whole universe—is/are yours. You do not belong to them; they belong to you, as your servants, because “you—and they—are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.”
“The Corinthian error is an easy one to repeat. Not only do most of us have normal tendencies to turn natural preferences into exclusive ones, but in our fallenness we also tend to consider ourselves “wise” enough to inform God through whom he may minister to his people. Our slogans take the form of “I am of the Presbyterians,” or “of the Pentecostals,” or “of the Roman Catholics.” Or they might take ideological forms: “I am of the liberals,” or “of the evangelicals,” or “of the fundamentalists.” And these are also used as weapons: “Oh, he’s a fundamentalist, you know.” Which means that we no longer need to listen to him, since his ideology has determined his overall value as one who speaks in God’s behalf. It is hardly possible in a day like ours that one will not have denominational, theological, or ideological preferences. The difficulty lies in our allowing that it might really be true that “all things are ours,” including those whom we think God would do better to be without. But God is full of surprises; and the Eternal One may choose to minister to us from the least expected of sources, if we were but more truly “in Christ” and therefore free in him to learn and to love.
This does not mean that one should not be discriminating; after all, Paul has no patience for that teaching in Corinth which had abandoned the pure gospel of Christ. But to be “of Christ” is also to be free from the tyrannies of one’s own narrowness, free to learn even from those with whom one may disagree.” (NICNT)