1. Koine Greek was the common language throughout the
empire.
2. Diaspora Judaism. Synagogues in most cities provided
a place to begin preaching.
3. Religious Climate of Despair. People were seeking answers
about God and life.
4. Pax Romana (Roman Peace) provided relatively
safe travel throughout Roman Empire.
1. Introductory Salutation:
A. Sender to Addressee
B. Greetings {Chairein
in Greek}
C. A Wish for Good Health, often saying
that the sender prays to a certain deity on behalf of
the Addressee
2. Body of Letter:
A. Often begins with standard formulae
B. Comments are often brief and impersonal
in tone
3. Closing:
A. Final Greetings (includes people
other than addressee)
B. Good wishes, especially for people
other than addressee
C. Concluding greeting or prayer
D. Sometimes a date
4. Address on the reverse side of the letter (letter was usually
folded)
1. Opening:
A. Paul (may add "an apostle of Jesus
Christ") to Addressee (church or individual)
B. Grace to you and peace ("Greetings"
[Chairein] becomes "Grace" [Charis]; adds the
Jewish greeting "peace" [=Hebrew Shalom])
2. Thanksgiving Section:
A. Thanks God for the spiritual growth or
spiritual gifts of the readers, or prays for their
spiritual well being (modification of Health Wish)
B. Contents provide Introduction to Letter's
themes
C. Commonly ends with Eschatological climax
3. Body of Letter:
A. Often begins with introductory formulae
B. Main part of letter presents Task Theology
C. Provides exhortations to correct behavior
based on Task Theology
4. Closing:
A. Formulaic Benedictions and Greetings to
individuals
B. Greetings from certain people with Paul
C. May mention Letter writing Process (scribe
adds his own greeting; Paul comments on his
signature, etc.)
A. Determine the particulars of Paul's situation when he writes. Such details may be found throughout the letter, but pay special attention to the beginning and end of the epistle to discover where and when he writes, who is with him, and what his present travel plans are. Also pay attention to Paul's frame of mind. When he writes is he happy or depressed or angry? What reasons are there for his emotional condition?
B. Determine Paul's past and present feelings toward his addresses.
1-10
Tarsus (birth and
Phil 3:3-6
9:11; 21:39;
early childhood
2 Cor 11:22
22:3; 23:34;
in Judaism)
Rom 9:3; 11:1, 14 26:4-5
Roman Citizen
16:37-40; 22:
by Birth
25-29; 23:27
Tentmaker 18:3
Aramaic=Mother
Phil 3:6
21:40; 22:2; 26:14
Tongue
??
Rabbinic training
cf. Gal 1:13-14
22:3; cf. 23:6;
in Jerusalem under
26:4-8
Gamalial
30-33
Persecution of
Gal 1:13-14, 23;
7:5-8:3; 9:1-2;
Christians
Phil 3:6; 1 Cor 15:9 22:4-5; 26:11
33
Conversion on the
Gal 1:15-16
9:3-19; 22:6-16
way to Damascus
33-35
In Damascus and
2 Cor 11:32-33;
9:20-25
Arabia
Gal 1:17
"Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem ..." (Gal 1:18).
35
Return to
Gal 1:18-19
9:26-29; 22:17-21
Jerusalem
35
To Tarsus--
Gal 1:21
9:30
|
In Antioch with
11:22-26
|
Barnabbas--
|
To Jerusalem for
11:27-30
48
Famine Relief
47-48
1st Missionary Journey
13-14
Cyprus
13:4b-12
South Galatia
13:13-14:25
Antioch
14:26-28
49
Jerusalem Conf.
Gal 2:1-10 (?)
15:1-35
49-50
2nd Missionary Journey
15:40-18:22
Syria & Cilicia
15:40-41
South Galatia
16:1-5
Troas
16:8-10
Philippi
1 Thess 2:2
16:11-40
Thessalonica
1 Thess 2:2;
17:1-9
Phil 4:15-16
Beroea
17:10-14
Athens
1 Thess 3:1
17:15-34
50
1-2 Thessalonians
50-52
Corinth (for 18
2 Cor 11:7-9
18:1-18a
months)
Cenchreae
18:18b
Ephesus
18:19-21
Caesarea to
18:22
Antioch
52-57
3rd Missionary Journey
18:23; 19:1-21:16
52
Across Asia
18:23
52-55
Ephesus (2 yrs. & 3 mo.)
19:1-41 (19:8-10)
55
Corinthians A
1 Cor 5:9; 7:1;
(now lost)
16:17
55
1 Corinthians
55 (Spr)
Painful visit
2 Cor 2:1, 5
to Corinth
55 (Spr)
Painful Letter
2 Cor 2:3-4
(=Corinthians C)
55
Troas
2 Cor 2:12
56 (Wi-Sp)
Macedonia
2 Cor 2:13
20:1-4
56 (Win)
2 Corinthians
57
Corinth (3 months--longer?)
20:3
57
Galatians
57
Romans
57
Troas
20:5-12
57
Miletus
20:17-38
57
to Tyre
21:1-6
57
Caesarea
21:7-14
57
Jerusalem
Rom 15:25-32
21:15-23:30
57-??
To Rome
23:31-28:31
57-59
Caesarea
23:33-26:32
59
to Rome
27:1-28:14
60-62
Roman Imprisonment
28:15-31
60-62
Colossians, Ephesians,
Philemon, (Philippians?)
64/65
Spain (?)
Rom 15:24, 28
(1 Clement 5:7)
??
Pastoral Epistles (??)
65 ?
Paul's Death
(1 Clement 5:7)
Corinth has a long and colorful history. Prior to its complete destruction
by the Roman general L. Mummius in 146 BCE, Corinth was well known for
its worship of Aphrodite. According to the ancient geographer Strabo, the
temple of Aphrodite had over 1,000 cult prostitutes in "temple service"
(Geog. 8.378), although this number is probably an exaggeration.
Corinth had a reputation for sexual vice, and Greeks from other areas used
the term "to Corinthianize" as an expression for immoral activity (Aristophanes,
Fragment 354; cf. Plato, Republic 404d). The Athenians tended
to stereotype Corinthians, portraying them in comedies as drunks, prostitutes
and letchers. Strabo even records a proverb that warns "Not for every man
is the voyage to Corinth" (Geog. 8.378).
Yet all of these sources describe the city
prior to 146 BCE. After Mummius razed the city, the site remained
in ruins for 100 years until 44 BCE, when Julius Caesar made provision
to establish a Roman colony there, naming it Colonia Laus Iulia Corinthus.
He gave land to Roman settlers (many of them retired soldiers) and emancipated
Greeks from Italy. At first Latin was the official language, but as more
Greeks settled in the area, it was replaced with Greek. A variety of religions
flourished in Corinth, and there were enough Jews to support a synagogue
(archaeologists discovered an inscription reading "Synagogue of the Hebrews").
Because of its strategic location on an important trade route, Corinth
again grew and prospered. In 27 BCE it became the capital of the province
of Achaia.
Merchants used the narrow Isthmus of Corinth
to transport goods from the Peloponnesus through the Gulf of Corinth to
the Saronic Gulf and on to mainland Greece and back. They unloaded their
ships' cargoes onto wagons and hauled them along a rock-paved road to the
other side. They also placed their ships on wheeled vehicles and transported
them overland on the same road. Although this involved substantial effort
and expense, it was much faster than sailing all the way around Achaia.
And because Corinth controlled this important transit spot, considerable
wealth flowed into the city from trade centers both to the east and to
the west. Shortly after the time of Paul, in 67 CE, the Emperor Nero attempted
to dig a canal across the Isthmus, but when he died the work ceased. Not
until 1881 was the project resumed, and in 1893 the canal was finished,
allowing ships to float across the six kilometers to the other side.
Due to the destruction of Corinth in 146 BCE,
few traces remain of the pre-Roman city. Archaeological excavation
of the site began in 1892 by the Greek Archaeological Service, which uncovered
little. Most of the significant discoveries began in 1896 with the systematic
work of the American School of Classical Studies located in Athens. The
ongoing efforts of this school until the present day have revealed the
remains of an impressive city. Culturally speaking, there was a gymnasium,
a large theater, an odeion, and a number of basilicas, baths and monuments.
A large market place (agora) provided focus for commerce, and a
variety of temples encouraged diverse worship possibilities.
Dominating the skyline today are the seven
remaining columns of the Temple of Apollo. These large Doric columns are
unusual in their construction. Instead of consisting of a number of sections
fastened together, each column is a unit, cut in its entirety from a single
massive block of stone. Similarly, the seats of the odeion are carved out
of a rock outcrop on a hillside, and the Glauce fountain is also cut out
of solid rock. Beneath the bath complex built around the Preirene Spring
are tunnels dug underground for kilometers to supply water. And the Acrocorinth,
the fortress built overlooking the city on top of the steep, rocky hill
just to the south, provided protection in case foreign armies invaded.
Review of events leading up to the writing of 2 Corinthians
Deciphering Paul's movements proves to be rather
difficult, partly because what he says in 2 Corinthians does not correspond
with the description of his third missionary journey in Acts. His somewhat
lengthy stay in Ephesus (Acts 19:10; 20:31) matches Paul's designation
of Ephesus as his place of residence when writing 1 Corinthians (see 1
Cor. 16:8), but thereafter things become more muddled. In Acts 19:21-22,
he plans to go from Ephesus to Macedonia, then down to Achaia (to Corinth),
then on to Jerusalem and finally to Rome. This in fact happens in Acts
20:1ff., although he ends up going to Rome as a prisoner. In 1 Cor. 16:1-8,
Paul's plans match the itinerary in Acts, but after sending this letter
things began to change.
In 2 Cor. 1:23 Paul explains that he avoided
traveling to Corinth to spare them another painful visit (2:1). Instead
he wrote them a painful letter (2:3-4). This letter must have been a real
scorcher, for after he sent Titus to deliver it, Paul was so emotionally
distraught that he could not keep his mind on his work. Instead of waiting
for Titus to return to Ephesus with word of how the Corinthians had responded
to his letter, Paul journeyed north to Troas. While there a door of effective
ministry was opened; but he was so distracted with worry about the Corinthian
situation that he could not keep his mind on his work, so he went on to
Macedonia (2:12-13). There he met Titus, who was returning with good news.
The fact that Paul took the land route to
look for Titus implies that it was winter time and therefore not feasible
to take a boat from Ephesus to Achaia. The fact that he speaks so much
of pain and consolation indicates the depth of the conflict he experienced
with the rebellious group at Corinth. Paul admits in 2 Cor. 7:5 that even
in Macedonia he could find no rest from his emotional turmoil. Not until
the arrival of Titus, with his message of love from the Corinthians to
Paul, does his anxiety give way to joy (7:6-7). Now Paul confesses how
much he regretted writing the Painful Letter (7:8), but he adds that the
effect was redemptive, so he no longer regrets sending this powerful epistle
(7:9-11).
Thus, it appears that sending 1 Corinthians
by Timothy did not produce the desired changes demanded by Paul. So, to
fulfill his warning in 1 Cor. 4:19 ("I will come to you soon, if the Lord
wills, and I will find out not the talk of these arrogant people but their
power. . . . What would you prefer? Am I to come to you with a stick, or
with love in a spirit of gentleness?"), he crossed the Aegean Sea and confronted
the guilty parties (=Painful Visit, 2 Cor. 1:23). This boldly confrontational
excursion evidently ended in defeat for Paul, and he returned to Ephesus
with the matter unresolved. From there he wrote the Painful Letter and
sent it by way of Titus.
After Titus' departure, Paul was in a deeply
agitated state of turmoil, so much so that he could not wait in Ephesus
for news of how his letter was received. Judging that Titus would be taking
the overland route due to the winter weather, Paul journeyed north to Macedonia,
where he met Titus, who was returning with good news. With a great sense
of relief, Paul dictated another letter, which we call 2 Corinthians, but
which was at least his fourth letter to this church.
Corinthians A = letter mentioned in 1 Cor.
5:9-13
Corinthians B = 1 Corinthians
Corinthians C = Painful Letter mentioned in
2 Cor. 2:3-4; 7:8
Corinthians D = 2 Corinthians
In Greek the term Galatian (Galavtai) is a variant form of Keltai (Kevltai), which means "Celts" (Galli in Latin). These people migrated from Central Europe and settled in North-Central Asia Minor, posing a formidable military threat to surrounding regions. They suffered a series of defeats about 230 B.C.E. at the hands of the king of Pergamum, Attalus, who confined them to the territory of Phrygia. Ancyra became the Galatians' capital city (Ankara, the modern capital of Turkey, is the same city). In 190 B.C.E. the Romans decisively defeated an army partly consisting of Galatians at the battle of Magnesia (between Ephesus and Pergamum), and henceforth there was a strong Roman presence in the area. In 25 B.C.E. Caesar Augustus made the territory of the Galatians part of a Roman province, which he called Galatia; but this province stretched south to the Mediterranean Sea, far beyond the actual ethnic homeland of the Galatian people. According to the Roman historian Pliny, in the first century the province of Galatia extended from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean (Natural History 5:147).
Thus, in Paul's day the Province of Galatia included the cities of Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, where he and Barnabas established churches on their first missionary journey (c. 47-48 C.E.; Acts 13-14). According to Acts 15, the Jerusalem Council met (c. 49 C.E.) to decide whether or not Gentile Christians should be circumcised in obedience to the Law of Moses, and not long after that meeting Paul left on his second missionary journey, traveling overland from Syrian Antioch to Lystra, where he picked up Timothy as a traveling companion (16:1-4). They traveled on "through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden by the Spirit to speak the word in Asia" (16:6). The account indicates that they then proceeded west: "When they had come opposite Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them; so passing by Mysia, they went down to Troas" (16:7-8). Similarly, the account of Paul's third missionary journey states that he left Syrian Antioch and "went from place to place through the region of Galatia and Phrygia, strengthening the disciples" (18:23). This follow-up trip shows Paul going back to the churches that he previously established, strengthening disciples. There is no indication in Acts that he ever journeyed north into ethnic Galatia, yet for centuries most scholars believed that Paul's letter was sent to churches in North Galatia.
The reason seems fairly simple: by the time Christians began writing commentaries on Galatians, the boundaries of Galatia had been redrawn, and this affected their understanding. In 137 C.E. the Lycaonian area of the Roman province of Galatia (which includes Iconium, Lystra and Derbe) was incorporated into the province of Cilicia (see map), and in 297 C.E. the rest of the southern part of the former province of Galatia was attached to a new province of Pisidia. Thus, during the time when early Christian commentaries were written, Galatia referred to what was only the northern part of Galatia in Paul's day. When they read "Galatia," they merely assumed (incorrectly) that it referred to the same geographical location as the Galatian province of their own time. Once established in Christian tradition, however, this North Galatian theory exercised a powerful influence on later thinking.
Some scholars still argue that Paul wrote Galatians for churches located in North Galatia, but their arguments are not particularly compelling. What presently is more of an issue is the time period in which Paul wrote the letter. If he wrote it prior to the Jerusalem Council of 49 C.E., that would explain why Paul never uses the decision of the Council, that circumcision was not necessary for Gentile Christians (Acts 15), as part of his argument. One would think that this decision of the Jerusalem Apostles would annihilate the argument of his opponents in Galatia, for they sought to deny Paul's apostolic authority by pitting him against the Peter and the others as they asserted that Gentiles needed to keep the Law of Moses and be circumcised. Perhaps Paul did not use the council's decision because the council meeting had not yet happened. If so, Galatians would have been written prior to the second missionary journey and would thus be the earliest extant letter of Paul.
Yet the parallels between Galatians and Romans are so numerous that Paul probably wrote Galatians shortly before he wrote Romans, in Corinth just prior to leaving for Jerusalem at the end of his third missionary journey (Rom. 15:25-32). Not mentioning the Jerusalem Council decision would fit his resistance in Galatians 1-2 to seeing his own apostolic authority as in any way subservient to Jerusalem. He asserts that God called him to be an apostle, and he gained no authority from Peter and the others.
Dealing with probabilities lies outside the realm of reporting facts, however, and definitively determining the time and place of composition of Galatians is currently impossible. On the one hand, we know from his other letters that Paul's views on certain issues, like the timing of the Parousia, changed over the years (as we shall see later on). This could indicate that the significant similarities between Galatians and Romans provide compelling evidence that these two letters were written quite near in time to each other. On the other hand, a dominant theological issue in both letters is salvation by faith and not by works of the law, and Paul easily could have maintained a consistent manner of teaching this belief over a number of years. After all, he had already been a Christian for some time before his first missionary journey. His central convictions probably remained unchanged in spite of minor modifications in lesser issues of his belief system.
When did Paul write Galatians? We cannot know for
sure, and deciding where to place the present chapter on Galatians in the
chronological progression of his letters in this book was problematic.
Perhaps it should come before 1 Thessalonians; perhaps it should come just
prior to Romans. The decision to place it right before 1 Corinthians is
actually based on theological considerations, not historical ones. Studying
Galatians first provides important insights into what Paul taught about
salvation by faith. Interacting with his views on Christian freedom from
the Law helps us see how the Corinthian Christians misunderstood this teaching
and misapplied it to form a deviant lifestyle. As some of the Christians
at Thessalonica misappropriated Paul's teaching on the Parousia to adopt
a lifestyle of laziness, so some at Corinth overextended his teaching on
grace to form a perverted kind of libertine lifestyle. Their behavior undoubtedly
strengthened the conviction of Paul's Jewish-Christian opponents that his
rejection of the relevance of the Law of Moses for Gentiles was a mistake
of immense proportions.
A standard theory for centuries has been that Paul wrote Philippians from house arrest in Rome, following his appeal to Caesar. But the problems with this theory are so plentiful as to render it highly objectionable. First, the Roman imprisonment described in Acts 28 is a comfortable one in which Paul is free to entertain guests and preach to those who could freely come to visit him. In Phil. 1:12-13 he only mentions witnessing to the Praetorian Guard, and in 1:19-23 he expresses uncertainty over whether or not he will receive the death sentence. Second, there are in Philippians a total of five different communications that go back and forth between Paul and the church at Philippi, and another four trips that Paul plans for the future.
Consider the following: (a) Although Acts says nothing of Timothy being with Paul in Rome, Phil. 1:1 includes Timothy in the greeting; (b) the Philippian Christians have received word that Paul is in jail and in need of help (4:14); (c) Epaphroditus travels from Philippi to bring money to Paul in prison (4:18); (d) while with Paul, Epaphroditus gets gravely ill and word reaches the Philippians of his condition (2:26); (e) word then travels back to Paul that they are quite concerned about Epaphroditus, and the messenger becomes distressed because they are worried about him (2:26); (f) Paul plans to send Epaphroditus back to Philippi (2:28); (g) Paul plans to send Timothy to them soon, in order to find out how they are doing (2:19); (h) Timothy will bring news back to Paul from Philippi (2:19); and (g) Paul plans to come to Philippi soon himself, provided he gets out of prison (2:24). The frequency of these communications back and forth poses immense difficulties for those who claim that he was in Rome when he wrote the letter.
For news to travel from Philippi to Rome, the messenger would have to walk 380 miles on the Via Egnatia to the port city of Dyrrachium, take a two-day boat trip to Brundisium in Italy, and then travel another 360 miles on the Via Appia to Rome (see map). At a rate of 15 miles a day, such a trip would require about 50 days. Paul's comments in Philippians indicate that he was much closer to Philippi, and communication was going back and forth much too rapidly for a round trip time of over 100 days. We must look elsewhere for a place of imprisonment. The best option is Ephesus.
In 1 Corinthians, which Paul wrote from Ephesus, there are indications that Paul had experienced some difficult times. In 4:9 he states, "For I think that God has displayed us apostles as last, as condemned to death, because we have become a spectacle (Greek theatron) to the world and to angels and to men." And in 15:32 he asks, "If with only human aspiration I fought the wild beasts in Ephesus, what benefit is that to me?" Whether he means that he actually experienced some sort of public display in a Roman arena with animals or whether he means these comments symbolically is difficult to know, but his comments in 2 Corinthians indicate that at a later time he endured a terrifying experience in Ephesus.
In 2 Cor. 1:8-9 Paul says, "For we do not want you to be without knowledge, brothers, concerning our affliction which happened in Asia. Because we were so utterly, unbearably crushed that we doubted we would live through it. We thought that we had received the sentence of death." Clearly, Paul and his companions had received such brutal treatment that they did not believe they would survive the ordeal. Although he does not specify exactly where in Asia this occurred, the location was probably Ephesus. The fact that Acts is silent about an imprisonment in Ephesus does not pose a major difficulty, given the highly selective nature of what Acts records of Paul's activities.
The various communications between Paul and the Philippian Christians that he mentions in his letter make much more sense if he was imprisoned in Ephesus. The distance between the two cities is not nearly so great as from Philippi to Rome. Acts 16:11-12 indicates that it took Paul three days to travel from Troas to Philippi, and Acts 20:13 states that it took him five days to return from Philippi to Troas (two days longer because of head winds?). If it took another four days to journey from Troas to Ephesus, the entire trip would require only seven to nine days of continual travel. This time framework fits nicely with Paul's words in Philippians.
Although the evidence for an Ephesian origin of Paul's
letter to Philippi is not completely compelling, it is a convincing theory.
Not only do the distances involved match what is said in the epistle, but
there are also other factors that add to this view. Acts 19:22 claims that
Timothy was with Paul in Ephesus, as do Phil. 1:1 and 2:19-23; but Acts
makes no mention of Timothy ever being in Rome with Paul. Phil. 4:10 speaks
of the Philippians being concerned for Paul but having no opportunity to
send any aid. Yet this hardly would be the case if he were in prison in
Rome some twelve years after he first visited Philippi, not to mention
the fact that Acts 20:6 says that Paul was again in Philippi toward the
end of his third missionary journey. Only if Philippians were written earlier
in Paul's journeys would his comment in Phil. 4:10 make sense. Thus, the
most reasonable theory is that Paul wrote Philippians from a prison in
Ephesus, and he was released from his imprisonment as he thought he would
be ("I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus
Christ this will turn out for my deliverance" [1:19]; "Since I am convinced
of this, I know that I will remain and continue with all of you for your
progress and joy in faith, so that I may share abundantly in your boasting
in Christ Jesus when I come to you again" [1:25-26]; "I trust in the Lord
that I will also come [to you] soon" [2:24]).
Because Romans consists of an extended development of Paul's theology, many people mistakenly conclude that it is more of a theological tract than a letter to specific people. Compared with his other correspondence that we have studied so far, Romans lacks the personal touches wherein he addresses particular problems that need to be corrected. 1-2 Corinthians brim full of issues of conflict between Paul and these Christians; 1-2 Thessalonians speak of the problems faced by young Christians encountering strong opposition and experiencing confusion over the second coming of Christ; Galatians forcefully rebukes people for being swayed from their commitment to Paul's teaching; Philippians expresses thanks for money sent to Paul while he was in prison and warns against false teachers. Each of these letters abounds in references to situations peculiar to their recipients' situations. Romans, however, seems to contain almost none of these characteristics.
In this letter Paul does not lash out at opponents. Indeed, he does not attack anyone. Whereas in his other letters we find the apostle addressing a variety of topics of concern, in Romans we read one long and sustained theological argument. Whereas the other letters abound in personal references that identify problems specific to each congregation, Romans offers few clues as to the condition of its intended audience.
Scholars put forward a number of hypotheses to explain its purpose. Some say it is Paul's means of introducing his theology to the Romans. Others claim that Paul sought to assert his apostolic authority by sending this treatise to the capital of the Gentile world. Still others maintain that Romans is dominated by Paul's thinking about Jerusalem, so even though he sends it to Rome, the message is more for Jerusalem. Yet another theory is that the formal style of Romans shows it to be a circular letter, with Rome as only one of its destinations. It could therefore just as effectively have been sent elsewhere, for it is a summary of Pauline theology, not a personal letter. More and more, however, a substantial number of scholars view Romans as Paul's effort to correct a serious problem at Rome. Like the other Pauline epistles, it is an expression of task theology.
Since the time of Martin Luther, an extremely popular approach has been to view the main purpose of Romans as an exposition of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. With increased belief that the letter addresses a very real problem at Rome, however, a new paradigm has emerged. Many now believe that Paul's major emphasis in Romans on salvation by faith is part of his effort to explain the place of Jews and Gentiles in God's larger purpose for his chosen people. In other words, Romans addresses the argument over the place of Jew and Gentile in the Church and what it means to be a faithful Christian. The formal style and extensive explanation of theology stem partly from the fact that Paul had never been to Rome (1:13) and partly from the magnitude of the issue addressed.
Historical Background for Romans
A.D. 49: Emperor Claudius expels all Jews from Rome (= Expulsion edict of 49) because of riots in the Jewish sectors.
The Roman historian Suetonius, writing 70 years later,
said that the riots in the Jewish sectors began at the instigation of a
certain Chrestos.
Chrestos = slave name meaning "Good"
Christos = title for Jesus = "Messiah"
Riots in the Jewish sectors were probably caused by the Missionary proclamation that Jesus is the Christ. Claudius did not know Christian Jews from nonChristian Jews. He expelled them all.
A.D. 54: Claudius dies and Nero assumes rule. Nero's wife liked Jews and convinced him to allow them to return to Rome.
A.D. 57: Paul writes Romans. Jewish Christians are once again living in Rome.
Significant Words for Paul
Righteousness of God in Romans:
Greek noun dikaiosunë means "righteousness" or "justice."
Greek verb dikaioö is translated "to justify." We
have no verb form in English that means "to righteous."
Possible meanings of dikaioö in Romans:
1) Declare Righteous (legal fiction). God says we are
righteous (or innocent) although we are not.
2) Make Righteous. God gives a new nature and makes us righteous.
3) Covenant Relationship. To be righteous is to keep the
covenant. Righteousness describes a relationship with God through
Christ. Righteousness is a positive relationship with God, not some
sort of conforming to a legal norm. Righteousness might describe
what God does more than who God is: God's righteousness is the power
by which He restores sinners to a positive relationship with Himself.
Redemption: deliverance from something (usually slavery) by the payment of a price called a ransom. For Paul this meant the price paid to liberate us from sin. Jesus' death on the cross frees sinners from slavery to sin and the death penalty incurred because of sin. The ransom price is the blood of Christ, shed on the cross.
Reconciliation: doing away with a problem that causes hostile
parties to be enemies. Accomplished when God sent Jesus to die for
sinners, whom Paul calls enemies of God in Rom. 5:10.
Hence there are by nature various classes of rulers and ruled. For the free rules the slave, the male the female, and the man the child in a different way. And all possess the various parts of the soul, but possess them in different ways; for the slave has not got the deliberative part at all, and the female has it, but without full authority, while the child has it, but in an undeveloped form. (Politics I 1260a 9-14)
One may find likenesses and so to speak models of these various forms of a constitution in the household. The relationship of a father to sons is regal in type, since a father's first care is for his children's welfare. . . The relationship of husband to wife seems to be in the nature of an aristocracy: the husband rules in virtue of fairness, and in matters that belong to a man' sphere; matters suited to a woman he hands over to his wife. When a husband controls everything, he transforms the relationship into an oligarchy, for he governs in violation of fitness, and not in virtue of superiority. And sometimes when a woman is an heiress it is she who rules. In these cases then authority goes not by virtue but by wealth and power, as in an oligarchy. . . . Democracy appears most fully in households without a master, for in them all the members are equal; but it also prevails where the ruler of the house is weak, and everyone is allowed to do what he likes. (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics VIII 1160b 23-1161a 10)
There is a primary constitution in the union of a man and a woman according to law for the begetting of children and for community of life. This is called a house, which is the beginning of a city, . . . . The man has the rule of this house by nature. For the deliberative faculty in a woman is inferior, in children it does not yet exist, and it is completely foreign to slaves. Rational household management, which is the controlling of a house and of those things related to the house, is fitted for a man. (Areius Didymus, Stob. II. 148, 5-9; 149, 5-9)
The women are best suited to the indoor life which never strays from the house, within which the middle door is taken by the maidens as their boundary, and the outer door by those who have reached full womanhood. (Philo, Special Laws III. 169)
The woman, says the law, is in all things inferior to the man. Let her accordingly be submissive, not for her humiliation, but that she may be directed, for the authority has been given by God to the man. (Josephus, Against Apion II. 199)
In the text of Eph. 1:1, your translation will either read "To the saints who are in Ephesus and are faithful in Christ Jesus" or simply "To the saints who are also faithful in Christ Jesus." Your Bible should also contain a footnote mentioning that "in Ephesus" is not found in the earliest manuscripts of Ephesians. The oldest manuscript of Paul's letters, Papyrus #46, which dates back to around 200, reads "to the saints and faithful ones." Similarly, the very significant manuscripts Vaticanus (from the early fourth century) and Sinaiticus (no later than mid fourth century) also omit "in Ephesus." Other evidence for the absence of Ephesus as the destination of this letter may be seen in the third-century theologian Origen, who did not find "in Ephesus" in his text; and neither did the heretic Marcion, who wrote about 140. Thus, the evidence is quite compelling that the original version of Ephesians contained no reference to Ephesus in 1:1. The words "in Ephesus" were added by a copiest some time near the end of the forth century, and many manuscripts after that time included these words.
Various theories exist for why Ephesus came to be considered the city to which Paul wrote this letter. Marcion thought it was the Letter to the Laodiceans that Paul mentions in Col. 4:16: "And when this letter has been read among you, have it read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you read also the letter from Laodicea." He probably made this connection on the basis of Tychicus being the designated letter carrier of both letters (Eph. 6:21; Col. 4:7) and the fact that the two documents share so much in common. Marcion may have been correct in his judgment, but there are problems with his theory.
Unlike Colossians, which contains specific information
addressed to the situation at Colossae, Ephesians is remarkably devoid
of such references. And the language of Ephesians is very liturgical, with
lengthy statements of theology permeating its pages. So formal is the language
that this document sounds much more like a sermon with no specific audience
than a letter addressed to a particular church. Notice as you read through
the exalted language of the long and densely packed sentences how much
Ephesians differs from the Pauline letters we have read so far. Many scholars
believe that it was designed to function as a circular sermon, meant to
be read to a number of churches in the Lycus River valley. If written by
Paul, the similarities with Colossians would result from the fact that
he wrote the two texts at about the same time and delivered them by the
same person, Tychicus.
1 Timothy
Because of the differences between 1 Timothy and all the letters
from Romans through 2 Thessalonians, the majority of New Testament scholars
believe that Paul did not write this letter. It exhibits a stronger emphasis
on orthodox belief, which is frequently called "the faith," encourages
a more settled attitude toward living in society (2:1-2), demands a restricted
role for women and even says that they are saved through child bearing
(2:9-15), emphasizes an established hierarchy for church leaders, who are
ordained by the laying on of hands (3:1-13; 5:17-22), endorses an order
for older widows and marriage and child bearing for younger widows (5:3-16),
provides all sorts of information that Timothy, his long time companion
should already know, and uses many distinctive words and phrases (e.g.,
"God our Savior" 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; "Christ Jesus our hope" 1:1; "The saying
is sure and worthy of full acceptance" 1:15: 3:1; 4:9). Consequently, most
scholars believe that someone penned this epistle in Paul's name after
the apostle's death as a way of gaining greater authority for what was
considered orthodox teaching by the author. They believe that the heresy
presupposed by 1 Timothy represents a later form of Gnosticism than existed
during Paul's lifetime, and to suppress its influence among Christians
the author wrote in Paul's name.
Some NT scholars do arugue for Pauline authorship of the Pastorals, however, and information defending this view is presented below.
Titus
Titus was Paul's co-worker for some time. He is first mentioned as
having accompanied Paul to the Jerusalem Council in Gal. 2:1, 3, where
Paul states that this uncircumcised Gentile was not compelled to be circumcised.
He evidently was a rather forceful individual, for although Timothy was
unable to bring order to the Corinthian church, Titus delivered the Painful
Letter and successfully brought these arrogant Christians to repentance
(2 Cor. 7:6-16). Paul also sent him on ahead with 2 Corinthians and charged
him with collecting money for the saints at Jerusalem before Paul arrived
from Macedonia (2 Cor. 8:16-24). Thus, Titus was a trusted associate of
Paul's and an effective leader in his own right.
Authorship of the Pastoral Epistles
As mentioned above, the majority of New Testament scholars believe
that the Pastoral Epistles were written after the death of Paul by an unknown
Christian who represented a later form of orthodoxy. For many this is such
a foregone conclusion that questioning it seems ridiculous. Data such as
the striking linguistic and theological differences between these letters
and authentic Pauline epistles, as well as the fact that the historical
setting does not match anything mentioned in Acts (e.g., Paul was never
in Crete or Nicopolis--Titus 1:5; 3:12), are taken as definitive proof.
Yet a small percentage of scholars representing a variety of theological
perspectives do argue in favor of Pauline authorship. And their reasons
are not all solely based on religious/psychological needs to maintain Paul
as the author simply because the letters claim to be written by him and
they are part of the New Testament canon.
The story of Paul in Acts concludes with him in a rather comfortable house arrest situation in Rome, allowed to preach the Gospel to those who came to listen. No mention is made of the final outcome of the trial--whether he was released or executed. If the emperor judged in Paul's favor and released him, the apostle would probably have proceeded to go to Spain as he said in Rom. 15:24 that he planned to do. There is evidence in an early Christian document called 1 Clement that this is precisely what happened.
Around 95 CE a leader in the church of Rome by the name of Clement wrote to the still wayward Christians at Corinth, seeking to bring about good order in the church there. In this letter Clement uses Paul as an example of patience and one who endured the ill effects of jealousy. In the process he says concerning Paul, "he taught righteousness to all the world, and when he had reached the limits of the West he gave his testimony before the rulers, and thus passed from the world and was taken up into the Holy Place" (1 Clement v.7). From the perspective of first-century Mediterranean people, Spain was the "limits of the West."
If Paul spent several years doing missionary work in Spain and then returned to Asia Minor to check on the churches there, he might have discovered that the heresy he refuted in Colossians had developed further and grown in popularity. 1 Tim. 1:15 bleakly states "all who are in Asia have turned away from me, including Phygelus and Hermogenes." Perhaps Paul returned to such a horrible situation in the church that he concluded that it was necessary to stress the orthodox nature of his message over against the syncretistic heresy that polluted his converts. His visit to Crete was simply part of his return voyage from Spain, and in order to maximize his efforts he left Titus there and Timothy in Ephesus to try to regain order. He then journeyed on north to Macedonia and west toward Nicopolis. Somewhere along the way he was arrested and imprisoned in Rome, this time under much more severe conditions than are described in Acts.
Thus, 2 Timothy reflects a weary Paul at the end of his life, struggling with feelings of loneliness and boredom, but not quite despair. He passes the mantle on to Timothy, his rather timid co-worker, pressuring him to give his life in defense of the Gospel.
Problems remain with this reconstruction, and scholars will continue to debate the issues involved. There is simply enough ambiguity in the evidence that a positive ascription of Pauline authorship or a positive denial of his authorship overstates the case. Why anyone would write 2 Timothy, which does not glorify Paul, in the apostle's name is unclear. Why Paul would write 1 Timothy and Titus, largely manuals of church discipline, to trusted co-workers is equally mysterious. Why are there so many similarities between 2 Tim. 4:9-15 and Col. 4:7-17 if these letters were written during different Roman imprisonments? Questions abound. Holding one's position on authorship with a certain degree of humility seems most appropriate.