!

!
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

regarding the motivations of ancient giving has yet to be obtained.

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

communities through civic benefaction and persuasive rhetoric.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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

Ways to Interpret the Jerusalem Collection

The Jerusalem Collection, as described by David J. Downs, can be understood in four

ways: an eschatological event, an obligation, an ecumenical offering, and a material relief.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

and an ecumenical offering, which yields an ecumenical obligation.

An Eschatological Collection

There are multiple interpretations on the collection as an eschatological event, two of

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

viewing the Jerusalem collection as an eschatological event, because he understands the

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

difficult to accept because of the lack of evidence supporting it.12

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,

Downs contends that is literally referencing the economically disadvantaged.18

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.

Benefaction in the Greco-Roman World

The Greco-Roman world was largely defined by benefaction, a hierarchical system

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

form of benefaction that assists in making his collection successful.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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

explanation of euergetism, stating:

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

of a heightened social status.27 While benefaction was intended as a symbiotic relationship

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 the Benefactor

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

This topic is a subject of division in scholarship. Some scholars find it unacceptable to

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

examining the concept of salary in the Greco-Roman world.

The Issue of Salary

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

of the collection to assist him with expenses?38

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

structure of benefaction. Furnish goes on to say:

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

their financial situation and became bi-vocational to offset their expenses.

The Collection as

Although Pauls Jerusalem collection was heavily influenced by benefaction in the

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

and Gentile believers.

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

contribution.43 However, another meaning can be denoted in Demosthenes third Philippic

Oration: (Demosthenes Or. 9:28). Ogereau

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
43
Julien M. Ogereau, "The Jerusalem Collection as Koinnia: Paul's Global Politics of Socio-Economic
Equality and Solidarity," New Testament Studies 58, no. 3 (July 1, 2012), 366.
!
 ! 12

determines this to be a reference to the establishment () of a common agreement or

partnership () among the Greeks to help each other () and unite politically and

militarily () against the threat of Philip of Macedon.44 The substantive form of

() 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.

Finally, Ogereau references Aristotles definition of in Politics, where it is understood

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

The Aim of the Jerusalem Collection

The primary purpose of the Jerusalem collection was to establish a genuine

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

community is its own ; yet, each must establish a common ground. As he

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

ecclesial unity between all believers.50

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

In 2 Cor 8:4, the Greek text states,

.53 Ralph P. Martin suggests that the reader

not view , , and as synonyms of the collection. Martin continues by

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:

, ,

, .56 Again, Paul encourages

the Corinthians to be generous by referencing the generosity of the Macedonians. David J.

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

what the Macedonians and the Lord have done.

Also, it is obvious that establishing a genuine among Jewish and Gentile

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

boundaries further than he could physically and culturally go.

Challenges to the Establishment of

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

the Jewish and Gentile Christians.

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.

--------. "Translocal Relationships Among Voluntary Associations and Early Christianity."

Journal Of Early Christian Studies 5, no. 2 (June 1, 1997): 223-241.

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.

Friesen, Steven J. "Paul and Economics: The Jerusalem Collection as an Alternative to

Patronage." Pages 27-54 in Paul Unbound. Edited by Mark D. Given. Peabody, Mass:
Hendrickson, 2010.

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.

Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians. Waco, Tex: Word Bks, 1986.

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.

! !