Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
!
GARDNER(WEBB!UNIVERSITY!
!
!
!
!
!
!
THE!JERUSALEM!COLLECTION:!
PAULS!METHOD!OF!RECONCILIATION!AMONG!!
JEWISH!AND!GENTILE!CHRISTIANS!!
!
!
!
!
!
SUBMITTED!TO!DR.!MCCONNELL!
!
FOR!PARTIAL!FULFILLMENT!OF!A!
!
MASTER!OF!DIVINITY!
!
DSNT!101A!
!
!
!
!
!
BY!
!
MICHAEL!HEREDIA!
!
!
!
!!
!
BOILING!SPRINGS,!NC!
!
DECEMBER!2013!
! 1
Introduction
In our contemporary Christian culture, tithes and offerings are viewed as a financial gift
to benefit the church and the needy. However, this act of generosity has been diluted of its true
significance over time. Many present-day congregants give to meet the standard ten percent
requirement. Unlike contemporary giving, the giving of resources in the biblical period was
viewed from a much different perspective. Despite various research endeavors, a consensus
An ancient form of giving can be seen in the collection for Jerusalem throughout the
Apostle Pauls ministry. In Gal 2:10, Paul recalls the request made by the church in Antioch to
remember the poor. This account, when paralleled with Acts 11:27-30, is often viewed as the
beginning of the collection. However, some scholars argue the collection was not a product of
the request in Gal 2:10 and Paul did not facilitate this collection.1 In order to understand the
purpose of the collection, one must explore the various lenses through which it can be
interpreted. These lenses include eschatology, obligation, ecumenism, and material relief. I will
maintain the traditional interpretation that Gal 2:10 and Acts 11:27-30 mark the beginning of
Pauls Jerusalem collection. Before further investigating the collection, certain questions must be
addressed: What are the cultural standards that led Paul to invest so much energy into this
collection? What was so important about giving support to the Jerusalem church? Given this
background, I will argue that Paul, under ecumenical obligation from the church in Antioch, uses
the Jerusalem collection as a vehicle of reconciliation between the Jewish and Gentile Christian
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1!David
J. Downs, The Offering of the Gentiles: Paul's Collection for Jerusalem in its Chronological,
Cultural, and Cultic Contexts (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008), 34.
!
! 2
Typically, scholars believe that Paul is motivated by only one of the four ways. However,!I!
suggest that they are not mutually exclusive. Instead, there is a correlation between!an obligation
An Eschatological Collection
which come from Johannes Munck and Burkhard Beckheuer.3 Munck argues that Pauls
collection has prophetic connotations. Referencing Isa 2:2-4, Isa 60:5, and Mic 4:1-2, he
connects Pauls collaboration with the Gentiles and the prophecies that predict the last days.4
Downs responds to this theory by claiming that Munck does not explain how the traditions are
present in Pauls discourse on the collection.5 He notes that Burkhard Beckheuer joins Munck in
collection as a completion of the Third Isaiah vision. This is exemplified throughout Rom 9-11,
which Beckheuer claims is full of references from Third Isaiah.6 Likewise, Mark Laing
concludes that in Pauls speech to Agrippa (Acts 26:1-7), he was aware that his journey was the
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2
Downs, The Offering, 3-26.
3
Ibid., 4-5.
4
Ibid., 4.
5
The use of evidence from Isa 2:2-4, Isa 60:5, and Mic 4:1-2, appear to have validity, particularly with the
knowledge of Pauls eschatology. However, I find it problematic to utilize these passages in this light without
examining how these traditions come to be and where they are present in Pauls discourse on the Jerusalem
collection (Downs, The Offering, 4).
6
Ibid., 6. See Isaiah!56:6(8;!60:1(14.!
! 3
fulfillment of Gods promise to the twelve tribes.7 With this evidence from Munck, Beckheuer,
and Laing, it is plausible to conclude that the Jerusalem Collection is significant in the
eschatological relationship between the Gentiles and Israel.8 However, it is difficult to correlate
the OT prophecies with Pauls collection for the Jerusalem believers because there is limited
evidence of Pauls desire to fulfill the OT prophecies of Isa 2:2-4, Isa 60:5, and Mic 4:1-2.
An Obligatory Collection
More widely accepted is the idea of the collection being an obligation. In Gal 2:10, Paul
and Barnabas are asked to remember the poor, which is traditionally understood as a
responsibility given to Paul by the Jerusalem church. Downs utilizes the perspectives of Karl
Holl and Klaus Berger to show what scholars believe makes this collection an obligation.9 Holl,
referencing Rom 15:26-27, suggests that Gentile contributors are indebted to the Jerusalem
church. Because Jerusalem was believed to be the hub of the early Christian movement, Paul and
his Gentile congregations were legally obligated to return financial support to the mother
church.10 Berger notes the cultural standards of Jerusalem and connects them to the collection.
He uses Acts 24:17 to contend that the collection was an almsgiving, or an opportunity for the
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
7
Mark T B. Laing, "The Pauline Collection for the 'Poor' in Jerusalem: an Examination of Motivational
Factors Influencing Paul," Bangalore Theological Forum 34, no. 1 (June 1, 2002), 89.
!
8
N.T. Wright and P. Walker dispute the idea that the Jerusalem collection is an eschatological event. They
conclude that Jerusalem has significant meaning in Pauls eschatology, but there is no evidence in the Pauline
Corpus that suggests Paul encouraged the Gentiles to go to Zion, nor to pray for the Jerusalem churches (Laing,
Pauline Collection, 89). Although unnecessary to support my thesis, I believe Wright and Walker are correct in
their views. It is difficult to understand the collection as a fulfillment of OT prophecy as Munck, Beckheuer, and
Laing do.
9
Ibid., 9-14.
10
Holl suggested that the Jerusalem community possessed a certain right of taxation over the entire
church (Ibid., 11).
! 4
Gentiles to be redeemed through charity and included in the covenant community.11 This claim is
An Ecumenical Offering
The frequent use of the word 13 in the Pauline Corpus leads many scholars to
interpret the collection as an ecumenical offering. Downs suggests that the collection serves as
an example of a voluntary expression of unity.14 Here, the collections purpose is to join the
Jewish and Gentile believers together through the same understanding of the gospel of Jesus
Christ. Oscar Cullmann supports this thesis and declares the collection a monumental act of
Pauline theology.15 Another scholar, Josef Hainz, argues that the collection was not a result of
the request in Gal 2:10.16 It was entirely formed from Pauls benevolence. Although it was a
measure of promoting and maintaining peace17, I will suggest that he was motivated by multiple
factors.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
11
Ibid., 11.
12
There is no evidence to show that the Gentile believers were ever considered full members of Gods
covenant. Also, it is difficult to dispute Pauls known opposition to Jewish identity markers; therefore, it is difficult
to imagine that the apostle to the Gentiles would have recognized another ethnic identity marker such as payment
of the temple tax or alms for the poor as a legitimate means of Gentile acceptance. See Downs, The Offering, 11.
13
See 2 Cor 8:4, 23; 9:3, 13; Rom 15:26.
!
14
Ibid., 15.
15
Cullmann states, It is much more than a humanitarian collection. It is an ecumenical affair and assumes
for Paul definite theological character (Ibid., 15).
16
Ibid., 16. Hainz claims the church in Antioch intended for the collection to be solely for ecumenical
purposes; therefore, the request to remember the poor was merely a reminder of the importance of the collection, not
an obligation. As we will examine in the following sections, I believe the collection is an obligation that serves an
ecumenical purpose.
17
Laing, The Pauline Collection, 88.
! 5
A Material Relief
Some scholars suggest that the collection is Pauls method of material relief. Unlike Karl
Holl, who argues that in Gal 2:10 and Rom 15:26 is used as a term of honorific poverty,
Therefore, the relief can also be considered a form of charity for the destitute. David Horrell
concludes that the collection is driven entirely by Pauls desire to give material relief to the poor
in Jerusalem,19 although I propose that Paul was motivated by more than one issue.
consisting of two entities: a benefactor (patron) and a client. Richard Saller defines benefaction
as a reciprocal relationship between patrons and clients.20 In the ancient world, relationships
functioned on the basis of benefaction. Culturally, it had no boundaries. It was present in both
the secular and religious realms.21 In the following sections, I will give an example of a specific
form of benefaction that is relevant to Pauls Jerusalem collection and argue that Paul engages a
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
18
Downs, The Offering, 19-20.
19
Horrell understands the collection as what he terms, materialist theology a theology which engages
with social, economic, and political realities, a theology which insists that the gospel has to do with the whole of
life, including the material conditions and socio-economic relationships in which people are enmeshed.!(Ibid., 21).
20
Saller further defines benefaction and the role of patrons and clients: By patron I mean a person who
uses his influence to assist and protect some other person, who becomes his client, and in return provides certain
services to his patron. The relationship is asymmetrical, though the nature of services exchanged may differ
considerably. (Steven J. Friesen, "Paul and Economics: the Jerusalem Collection as an Alternative to Patronage," in
Paul Unbound, ed. Christopher Tuckett (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 2010), 44-45.
21
S. Mott states, The formal obligation of rendering appropriate honor and gratitude to ones benefactor at
once motivated and controlled personal, political, and diplomatic conduct (Laing, The Pauline Collection, 85).
! 6
Civic Benefaction
Euergetism, formed from the Greek word meaning benefactor, was a form of
benefaction in which many participated during the Hellenistic period. Gregg Gardner defines
euergetism as a form of civic benefaction in which a voluntary gift to a city was recognized and
repaid with rewards that carried high symbolic value.22 Gardner gives a more detailed
A benefactor would personally provide the city with one or more contributions that might
include food, construction projects, public games, fortifications or other forms of defense,
victory in military campaigns or athletic competitions, various municipal services, and/or
provisions for the local cult. In return, the would be recognized for his or her
contribution/s with a prize drawn from a fairly standardized set of rewards.23
Thus, the benefactor would be regarded positively and given abundant authority. Those who
benefited from the patron erected statues and idols of the benefactors.24 Although benefactors
were highly esteemed, their practices presented many issues in the Jewish world. As people of
the Law, Jews viewed the rewards and statues given to benefactors to be in opposition to the
prohibition in Ex 20:4.25 Since they were unable to rectify the differences between the cultural
norms and their religious backgrounds, it is likely that most Jews would not have accepted
euergetism.
Bruce W. Longenecker interprets euergetism26 with the request made in Gal 2:10 in
mind. He argues that euergetism should not be directly connected with concern for the well-
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
22
Gregg Gardner, "Jewish Leadership and Hellenistic Civic Benefaction in the Second Century BCE,"
Journal Of Biblical Literature 126, no. 2 (June 1, 2007), 328.
23
Ibid., 328.
24
Ibid., 328.
25
Ibid., 328.
26
Longenecker defines euergetism as the doing of good deeds within the civic arena. It involved
donating significant amounts of ones own money in order to resource civic provision: roads, banquets, gladiatorial
games, monuments, baths, theaters, pavements, temples, warships, and the like. See Bruce W. Longenecker,
! 7
being of others. For Longenecker, the motivation for practicing euergetism was the obtainment
between benefactor and client, Longenecker argues that this was not the case. Although
benefactors provided the proper resources, most clients were unable to afford what was expected
in return, and thus were unable to give back to their benefactors successfully.28 The dichotomy
between Judaism and Hellenism and the interpretation presented by Longenecker forces one to
question Pauls intentions with the Jerusalem collection. Would Paul engage in Hellenistic
practices to fulfill the request of the church in Antioch? Did Paul subconsciously seek status
elevation through the collection? Did Paul receive benefits (monetary and/or material) for
supporting Jerusalem? These questions are not easily answered, and many scholars are divided in
their responses.
Paul spent much of his ministry collecting an offering from the Gentile churches to give
to the church in Jerusalem. In Gal 2:10, Paul was placed under voluntary obligation to collect
financial support for the poor in Jerusalem. Jrgen Becker states, Nevertheless, as an individual
who had given his word, Paul felt committed for life to this agreement.29 It is important to note
that Paul never forced, but instead highly encouraged the Gentile churches to support the
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Remember the Poor: Paul, Poverty, and the Greco-Roman World, (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 2010), 71.
27
Ibid., 71-72.
28
Ibid., 73. Longenecker does not give enough evidence to support his understanding of benefaction;
therefore, I find it difficult to agree with his position.
29
Jrgen Becker and O C, Jr Dean, Paul: Apostle to the Gentiles, (Louisville, Ky: Westminster/John Knox
Pr, 1993), 258.
!
! 8
Jerusalem church.30 In 2 Cor 8:8, Paul declares that he is not demanding that the Corinthians
give; instead, he is testing the genuineness of their love. Again, in 2 Cor 8:13-14, Paul reminds
the church in Corinth that he is not asking them to become financially burdened by their giving.
He suggests that they give their abundance for the needs of the church in Jerusalem, and in doing
so, decrease the gap between the wealthy and the poor.31
think Paul would use Hellenistic practices to assist the church in Jerusalem, while others suggest
Paul did partake in civic benefaction. David Downs deems the collection an act of worship,
rather than a form of benefaction. He believes the rhetoric is rooted in religious language.32 On
the other hand, Richard S. Ascough and Stephan Joubert argue that Paul actually participated in
benefaction. Ascough defends his proposal by investigating Pauline rhetoric in 2 Cor 8:1-5,
suggesting Paul uses political language.33 Likewise, Joubert examines the social relationships
present in the Jerusalem collection. He calls the collection a benefit of exchange. Joubert
states, Paul understood the collection as a benefaction by which Paul and his assemblies could
assist the Jerusalem believers.34 He shows that benefaction can also be applied to religious
functions. Supporting this evidence, Joubert also displays the complexity of benefaction in the
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
30
Becker states, Yet he [Paul] always made a point of stressing the free decision of the churches that he
asked for collection (e.g., 2 Cor 8:3-4; 9:2, 7) ,(Ibid., Paul, 258).
!
31
I do not mean that there should be relief for others and pressure on you, but it is a question of a fair
balance between your present abundance and their need, so that their abundance may be for your need, in order that
there may be a fair balance (2 Cor 8:13-14).
32
Friesen, "Paul, 49. Downs conclusion seems to overlook the potential for secular rhetoric. See The
Completion of Religious Duty: The Background of 2 Cor 8:1-15 Richard S. Ascough, New Testament Studies 42,
no. 4 (October 1, 1996), 584-599; here 596-599. Ascough proposes there is other rhetoric in use.
33
Ascough states, Paul appeals to the Corinthians by invoking the rivalry for honor, often found among
members of religious associations, in this case between the Macedonians and the Corinthians (Ibid., The
Completion, 598).
!
34
Friesen, Paul, 47.
!
! 9
Greco-Roman world and in the religious world, by concluding that the Jerusalem church was
also recognized as Pauls benefactor. He determines that Paul was a benefactor and a beneficiary,
just as Jerusalem was a benefactor and a beneficiary.35 However, this thesis can be disputed by
Most benefactors in the Greco-Roman world presumably received some form of benefit
for their patronage. For many scholars, such as Downs and Longenecker, this is problematic
when attributing the word benefactor to an Apostle. They deem it impossible for Paul to concern
himself foremost with the churches well-being while benefiting financially. Lars Aejmelaeus
suggests a different perspective.36 In 1 Cor 9, 2 Cor 11:7-12, and 2 Cor 12:13-18, Paul addresses
the issue of salary. Aejmelaeus argues the importance of examining the cultural norms of both
Jewish and Hellenistic customs pertaining to salary. It is also necessary to investigate how
religious and philosophical teachers in the Greco-Roman world made their living among those
with whom they interacted.37 We know through biblical accounts that Paul was an itinerant
preacher and a religious teacher among the non-Jews. Thus, we must determine how he received
funding for his missionary endeavors and how it connects with the Hellenistic norms. Did Paul
receive payment for being a benefactor to the Gentile churches with which he worked or did he
earn enough on the side that sufficed his needs? Is it possible that Paul would have kept a portion
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
35
Ibid., 47.
!
36
Lars Aejmelaeus, Salary: Paul and the Super Apostles, in Fair play: Diversity and Conflicts in Early
Christianity: Essays in Honour of Heikki Risnen, ed. Ismo Dunderberg, C.M. Tuckett, and K. Syreeni (Leiden;
Boston; Kln: Brill, 2002), 349. For further reading on understanding salary in the Greco-Roman world as it pertains
to Pauls ministry, I recommend this essay.
!
37
Ibid., 349.
! 10
Because of historical evidence, we can be certain that Paul earned some form of a living.
Many scholars maintain that Paul was bi-vocational: an itinerant preacher and an artisan.
Aejmelaeus suggests Paul funded most of his expenses through his artisan abilities.39 His work
as an artisan proved to be contrary to what the wealthy Hellenists deemed proper. Ronald F.
Hock explains that the wealthy view an artisan as one inferior even to a businessman.40 For this
reason, he argues that Pauls defense in 1 Cor 9:1-27 is due to his opposition to the standard
Hellenistic opinion. Victor P. Furnish further supports this proposition by stating, Among the
philosophers and itinerant teachers of Pauls day, continuing to work at a craft was regarded as
the least acceptable way of providing for lifes necessities. This accords with the generally low
estimate of craftsmen in the ancient world.41 Additionally, had Paul accepted financial support
from the Corinthians, he would have been required to submit a form of repayment because of the
The wealthy expressed and enhanced their power by becoming patrons of the needy. To
be the recipient of a benefaction was to be placed immediately under an obligation of
gratitude to the benefactor, and the gratitude of the beneficiary in turn placed the
benefactor under further obligation. Therefore, to accept a gift was to become a client of
and dependent upon the more privileged person. To refuse a benefaction was an act of
social enmity.42
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
38
This question is of particular interest to me. I believe that the answer could be either way. Our modern
idea of selling items on consignment leads me to question whether or not there may have been similar methods in
the Greco-Roman world. Perhaps Paul may have taken up money for the Jerusalem collection and at the same time
informed Gentile givers that a portion of money would go towards enabling him to continue on his missionary
endeavors.
39
Ibid., 350.
40
Ibid., 350. The upper class despised craftsmen To those of wealth and power, the appearance of the
artisan was that befitting a slave.
!
41
Ibid., 350.
42
Ibid., 352.
! 11
It is clear that Paul was working under rigid social structures, which he successfully overcame.
In all likelihood, Pauls audience consisted of members of the proletariat (1 Cor 1:26-28).
It is unlikely that he would have offended them by refusing their financial support. By doing so,
he avoided the cyclical structure of benefaction, while remaining a benefactor to the church in
Antioch. But, if Paul received financial support from the church in Antioch as Stephan Joubert
suggests, why would he need to be bi-vocational? This answer is inconclusive with the evidence
we currently have. One can be certain that Paul was aware of the financial necessities of his
journey. Thus, I suggest that Paul, as a benefactor to the church in Jerusalem and under the
Greco-Roman benefaction structure, was obligated to give relief to his supporting church
because of its support of his missionary journey. At the same time, he remained conscious of
The Collection as
Greco-Roman world, I suggest that Paul was motivated to do more than just meet the churches
financial needs. He was determined to see a genuine established between the Jewish
Julien M. Ogereau holds that there are various meanings to the term that may
accurately define the type of collection Paul conducted. When describing the Jerusalem
collection, first appears in 2 Cor 8:4 and 9:13, and its last appearance is in Rom 15:26.
Ogereau notes that in 2 Cor 9:13 and Rom 15:26, is frequently translated as a monetary
partnership () among the Greeks to help each other () and unite politically and
() is often the object of the verb and generally refers to political allies, business
associates, or the recipients of some benefaction.45 This definition supports my thesis that Paul
as a benefactor understood that the collection was also purposed for building relationships.
as the basic socio-political unit that is the basis of society that drives the culture to mutual
assistance.46
Building on the idea of mutual assistance, Luke Timothy Johnson argues that
should be interpreted as more than a matter of casual acquaintances.47 Johnson maintains that
insists on a mutual commitment of mind and resources that is based on three aspects:
equality, unity, and genuine obligation.48 Each of these has a significant role in Pauls Jerusalem
collection. Paul was fully aware of the issues he would face and the methods he would use to
counteract them. He tirelessly sought to establish a genuine between the Jewish and
Gentile Christians.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
44
Ibid., 369.
45
Ibid., 370.
46
The of the polis intrinsically implies, indeed demands from its citizens, sociability,
communality, interdependency, and solidarity, thereby placing the Athenians, in theory at least, under the common
obligation to assist one another. See ibid., 372.
47
Luke Timothy Johnson, "Making Connections: The Material Expression of Friendship in the New
Testament," Interpretation 58, no. 2 (April 1, 2004), 160.
!
48
Ibid., 160. Three aspects in particular were stressed. The first is that friendship involves unity and
equality, which is often expressed in terms of reciprocity. The second is that friendship is inclusive. It is not simply a
matter of sharing the same vision. It extends to the full sharing of all things, spiritual and material. Here is where
body language is significant: true friendship means active participation, sharing, and help between partners. The
third is that friendship involves genuine obligation.
! 13
among the Jewish and Gentile Christians. As we have seen, Paul was devoted to the request
made by the church in Antioch in Gal 2:10. Stefan Schapdick maintains that each Christian
suggests, each needs a point of origin, and that origin is the mother church in
Jerusalem.49 This ecumenical theme is addressed frequently in Pauls first letter to the
Corinthian church (1 Cor 1:2; 4:17; 7:17; 10:32; 11:16). Paul reiterates to the Corinthians that the
collection is not focused solely on monetary support. He insists that its primary focus is on the
Paul is also interested in creating fairness and equality between the Jewish and Gentile
Christians. The use of in 2 Cor 8:13-14 denotes this idea. According to Ogereau, Paul saw
on the part of the Christian as a regulative principle of mutual assistance as in the ideal
picture of Acts 2:44f; 4:36f. His thesis correlates with David J. Downs interpretation of 2 Cor
8:13-15.51 Paul desires to see a level of reciprocity among the members of his home church in
Jerusalem and those whom he is evangelizing. Although and are different terms,
they are to be viewed as synonyms in the context of Pauls Jerusalem collection. Ogereau
concludes his discussion by declaring that the collection was directed at refining societal
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
49
Stefan Schapdick, The Collection For The Saints In Jerusalem On (1 Cor 16.2) in
Feasts and Festivals, 147-160, ed. Christopher Tuckett (Leuven; Walpole, Mass: Peeters, 2009), 151.
!
50
Ibid., The Collection, 152.
!
51
Ogereau, The Jerusalem, 366. See also Downs, The Offering, 137, V. 13: Paul does not desire that the
recipients of the offering should have relief while the Corinthian contributors suffer affliction. Instead, Paul
envisions a reciprocal relationship in which the present abundance of the Corinthians will help to alleviate the
material needs of the saints in Jerusalem (and in which the situation may in the future be reversed), so that there
may be equality (v. 14).
! 14
inequalities in the Greco-Roman world.52 Paul genuinely cares to see the culture be transformed
and he is willing to accept the difficulties that exist in order to achieve a true Christian .
Pauls Methods
To fulfill the request made in Gal 2:10 successfully, Paul utilized other methods to gather
funding for the collection. An examination of Pauls rhetoric reveals the tactfulness of his
ministry. A careful exploration of the names he incorporates into his writings also shows how
Paul built a highly functional social network to assist in his endeavors of establishing a genuine
stating, We have taken here as a human privilege, a gracious act, while recognizing that it
has a theological underpinning, i.e., the Macedonians have acted in response to divine grace
which prompts and disposes all human endeavor. The thought goes back to (Cor) 8:1.54 He then
examines Pauls use of in this verse. in this context is more than the gaining
of fellowship. Pauls use implies the act of participating in an objective reality, the religious
good, which gives the basis and the norm by which the sharing is made possible and effective.55
Paul uses the Macedonians desire to support actively their fellowship as an example to
encourage other believers to contribute to the collection. His method was effective in motivating
the Corinthians to support their fellow believers in Jerusalem. It is evident that Paul was a master
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
52
Ogereau, The Jerusalem, 377.
53
Begging us earnestly for the privilege of sharing in this ministry to the saints 2 Cor 8:4 (NRSV).
54
Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians, (Waco, Tex: Word Bks, 1986), 254.
!
55
Ibid., 2 Corinthians, 254.
! 15
at rhetoric due to his involvement in both the Jewish and Hellenistic worlds. Unlike todays
society, his audience would have understood the rhetoric in its intended form.
Paul is also not afraid to use rhetoric as a means of delicate manipulation. 2 Cor 8:8-9
shows this:
, ,
Downs suggests that Paul is not above using the positive example of one congregation to stir up
support from the collection in another.57 His writing is clearly persuasive and has definite
motives leading the Corinthians towards generosity. In 2 Cor 8:9, Paul uses a distinct Greek
phrase that his audience would have understood, one that our modern translations often overlook.
The phrase is translated as for you know. A modern reader will assume this is
another Pauline transitional phrase. However, the meaning of the phrase is richer than what most
modern lay readers would understand. Martin argues that follows the typical
divine action paradigm, calling the early Christians to action.58 Therefore, this phrase enforces an
ethical call, and for the Corinthians, Paul is encouraging them to give generously because it is
Christians could not be accomplished alone. Throughout his missionary journey, Paul developed
a social network to assist him. Bruce J. Malina deems Paul a change agent and all change
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
56
I do not say this as a command, but I am testing the genuineness of your love against the earnestness of
others. For you know the generous act of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he
became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich. 2 Cor 8:8-9 (NRSV).
57
Downs, The Offering, 19.
!
58
Ibid., 263.
! 16
agents use opinion leaders. According to Malina, an opinion leader is an individual who is
able to influence the attitudes and/or behavior of others informally and in a desired way with
relative frequency.59 Pauls associates were Timothy, Silvanus, and Titus. They were Pauls
method of staying in contact with his churches. As opinion leaders, they knew the various
cultures and standards with which they were working and were able to influence decisions.
Therefore, the opinion leaders benefitted Paul and his missionary endeavors.60 By building this
social network, Paul was able to communicate and create his desired by stretching his
For Paul, the establishment of was met with challenges. Richard S. Ascough
addresses the issues of locality in the Greco-Roman world.61 Christian groups were primarily
concerned with their own local congregations. This is evident in 2 Cor 8:1-15; 9:1-5, where the
Christians in Corinth were seemingly unconvinced of their need to support an unknown group.
Julien Ogereau asks, What has Corinth to do with Jerusalem? What political treaty, economic
agreement, socio-cultural connection, or even ethnic relationship existed between the two cities
that could justify Pauls request?62 The Corinthians probably asked the same question. Ascough
elaborates on the confusion he believes the Corinthians had. He says, What confuses the
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
59
Bruce J. Malina, Timothy: Paul's Closest Associate (Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 2008), 62-63.
60
Ibid., 63-64. The selection of coworkers according to their interpersonal competence and personal
acquaintance with the Hellenistic client system served to minimize the social distance between the change-agent
system of the Jerusalemite Jesus group (James, Peter, and John, for example) and the client system of Israelites
living in the Hellenistic Mediterranean. Once Pauls proclamation was accepted, a homophilous coworker like
Timothy often halved the social distance between a change agent like Paul and his designated client population,
which consisted of Israelites resident among a non-Israelite majority.
61
See Richard S. Ascough, "Translocal Relationships Among Voluntary Associations and Early
Christianity" Journal Of Early Christian Studies 5, no. 2 (June 1, 1997), 223-241.
!
62
Downs, The Jerusalem, 360.
! 17
Corinthians is not necessarily the fact that they have to donate, but that the monies are going to
Jerusalem rather than the common fund of the local congregation.63 Under the standards of
benefaction, the Christians in Corinth were unable to comprehend why they were giving to the
Jerusalem church when it should have been the other way around.
Likewise, the Jewish Christians faced similar issues as the Gentile believers. With deep-
rooted traditions, Jewish Christians were slow to compromise their ancestral customs to
collaborate with the rest of the Greco-Roman world.64 Achtemeier notes that Paul struggled more
with the Jews that became Christians than with the Gentile converts.65 Being a Jew himself, he
understood the legalism and tradition with which he was in contention. His primary concern was
the division in the universal church that the disunity between Jewish and Gentile believers
created, and his mission was to overcome the dissension and reconcile the relationship between
Conclusion
As I have explored, Pauls motivation for the Jerusalem collection is more complex than
a request for financial relief of the poor in Jerusalem. David J. Downs describes several possible
motivations for the collection: eschatology, obligation, ecumenism, and material relief. Yet, the
complexity of the collection surpasses the surface level approach with which most readers
examine the text. While some scholars focus on one specific category as the motivation, I have
concentrated on its ecumenical and social contexts. Paul was motivated by the obligatory request
made in Gal 2:10 to redefine Christian , and because of his familiarity with the Greco-
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
63
Ascough, Translocal, 237.
64
Paul J. Achtemeier, The Quest for Unity in the New Testament Church: A Study in Paul and Acts,
(Philadelphia: Fortress Pr, 1987), 4.
!
65
Ibid., The Quest, 4. The issue at base was Jewish identity that expressed itself in Torah faithfulness.
! 18
Roman world, he was able to utilize civic benefaction and persuasive rhetoric to build this
genuine fellowship among Jewish and Gentile Christians. The collection was Pauls vehicle of
reconciliation of two cultures that would benefit from mutual concern for one another.
! 19
Bibliography
!
Achtemeier, Paul J. The Quest for Unity in the New Testament Church: A Study in Paul and Acts.
Philadelphia: Fortress Pr, 1987.
Aejmelaeus, Lars. Salary: Paul and the Super Apostles. Pages 343-376 in Fair play:
Diversity and Conflicts in Early Christianity: Essays in Honor of Heikki Risnen. Edited
by Ismo Dunderberg, C.M. Tuckett, and K. Syreeni. Leiden; Boston; Kln: Brill, 2002.
Ascough, Richard S. "The Completion of a Religious Duty: The Background of 2 Cor 8.1-15."
New Testament Studies 42, no. 4 (October 1, 1996): 584-599.
Becker, Jrgen, and O C, Jr Dean. Paul: Apostle to the Gentiles. Louisville, Ky:
Westminster/John Knox Pr, 1993.
Downs, David J. The Offering of the Gentiles: Paul's Collection for Jerusalem in Its
Chronological, Culture, and Cultic Contexts. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008.
Gardner, Gregg. "Jewish Leadership and Hellenistic Civic Benefaction in the Second Century
BCE." Journal Of Biblical Literature 126, no. 2 (June 1, 2007): 327-343.
Johnson, Luke Timothy. "Making Connections: The Material Expression of Friendship in the
New Testament." Interpretation 58, no. 2 (April 1, 2004): 158-171.
Laing, Mark T B. "The Pauline Collection for the 'Poor' in Jerusalem: An Examination of
Motivational Factors Influencing Paul." Bangalore Theological Forum 34, no. 1 (June 1,
2002): 83-92.
Longenecker, Bruce W. Remember the Poor: Paul, Poverty, and the Greco-Roman World.
Grand Rapids [etc.: William B. Eerdmans, 2010.
Malina, Bruce J. Timothy: Paul's Closest Associate. Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 2008.
Ogereau, Julien M. "The Jerusalem Collection as Koinnia: Paul's Global Politics of Socio-
Economic Equality and Solidarity." New Testament Studies 58, no. 3 (July 1, 2012): 360-
378.
! 20
Shapdick, Stefan. The Collection for the Saints in Jerusalem on (1 Cor 16.2).
Pages 147-160 in Feasts and Festivals. Edited by Christopher Tuckett. Leuven; Walpole,
Mass: Peeters, 2009.
! !