2. Travel Plans—Paul’s and Timothy’s (16:5–11)
With the triumphant words that brought the preceding argument to its conclusion (15:50–58), Paul has also brought to their conclusion the essential matters between him and the Corinthians that have come to him by way of both report and letter,. But two items from their letter (presumably) still require a brief word. Apparently they have written for further instructions as to their part in the collection for the poor in Jerusalem, especially how they are to go about it and how it is to get to Jerusalem. So he gives instructions similar to those given to other churches. Since these instructions included a word about his coming to pick up the collection, he digresses to speak about his own travel plans in coming to them (vv. 5–9). This in turn reminds him that Timothy may very well be arriving in the meantime, so he includes a word about how they are to receive him (vv. 10–11). While on the matter of travel plans, he concludes (v. 12) by returning to the final item from their letter: their request that Apollos return soon.
Unlike most of the letter, these final words have little that is openly confrontational; nonetheless, in light of what has preceded, one may see hints of tension here as well, especially since some of these items are the very ones that explode on him between this letter and his writing of our 2 Corinthians. Thus the way the apostle defuses potential trouble in some workaday, personal matters becomes both a lesson in Christian tact and instructive about how Paul managed his everyday relationships with his churches.
1Now about the collection for the Lord’s people: Do what I told the Galatian churches to do. 2On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with your income, saving it up, so that when I come no collections will have to be made. 3Then, when I arrive, I will give letters of introduction to the men you approve and send them with your gift to Jerusalem. 4If it seems advisable for me to go also, they will accompany me.
This is the first of three, perhaps four, instances in Paul’s letters where he mentions the collection for the “poor” among the “saints” in Jerusalem. According to what is said in an argument in a later letter (Gal. 2:9–10), part of the agreement reached with the “pillars” in Jerusalem regarding their mutual spheres of ministry included his willingness to “continue to remember the poor.” Apparently this collection was a major part of his concern during his third missionary tour, which functioned for him not only to bring relief to the poor, but also as his own attempt to bring unity between Gentile and Jewish believers. For Paul it was a matter of reciprocity, similar to his argument for support earlier in this letter (9:10–12), expressed later in yet another letter in terms of “the Gentiles hav[ing] shared in the Jews’ spiritual blessings, they owe it to the Jews to share with them their material blessings” (Rom. 15:27)—not to mention the fact that such generosity overflowed in expressions of thanksgiving and mutual prayer (2 Cor. 9:12–14).
None of this, however, is mentioned in our present passage, which makes one wonder as to (1) how and what the Corinthians had previously heard about this collection, and (2) what they may have said in their letter about it. On these questions we are left with only our best guesses, since Paul hardly alludes to such things here. Since so many other items in their letter appear to be responses to his previous letter (5:9), it seems probable that this, too, had been broached in that letter. Perhaps there he had explained its purpose and that the churches in Galatia had already agreed to participate. In any case, what Paul does here is to give some matter-of-fact directions about how they are to go about it (vv. 1–2) and what will happen to it when he comes (vv. 3–4).
1 This is the fifth “now about” in this half of the letter (beginning at 7:1) and, as before, suggests that Paul is responding to their letter. This is confirmed by several further items. First, the whole phrase “now about the collection for the Lord’s people” implies a new topic. But the fact that the destination of the collection is not mentioned in this phrase, and only indirectly where he refers to his own expected arrival (v. 3), implies that they well knew for whom it was intended. The same holds true, second, for the reality that Paul here offers so little information about the collection itself—its purpose, for whom, and its theological significance. Finally, third, this is probably the best explanation for the use of the word “collection” here and in the explicit instruction given in the next sentence (v. 2), which is the technical term for the actual activity of “taking up” the contributions. Since this word is not used again by Paul in any of the discussions of this “collection,” its use here is most likely a reflection of the Corinthian letter, and of their concern for how to go about the actual “collecting” of the money.
Elsewhere Paul speaks of this collection in terms that are full of theological content: “fellowship,” “service,” “grace,” “blessing,” and “divine service.” All of this together suggests that the “collection” was not some mere matter of money, but was for Paul an active response to the grace of God that not only ministered to the needs of the Lord’s people but also became a kind of ministry to God as well, which resulted in thanksgiving toward God and in a bond of fellowship between “the Lord’s people” across the Empire.
It is probably this aspect of “fellowship,” as well as perhaps a concern that the Corinthians see the collection within the broader framework of the church, that brings about the initial word of instruction: “Do what I told the Galatian churches to do.” Since Paul had just recently come through Galatia on his way to Ephesus (Acts 18:23), most likely at that time he also informed them of the collection and how they could best go about laying it aside. And since he did not plan to return to Jerusalem by way of these churches, the contribution was probably to be brought to him by one of their own.
2 With this sentence Paul proceeds to detail the instructions he had given to the churches of Galatia, which the Corinthians are now to follow as well. For them it is all very matter-of-fact; for us there are some intriguing items for which there is a degree of uncertainty. This is particularly true of the first two phrases, “on the first day of every week” and (lit.) “let each one by oneself.” Some have argued that “by oneself” means “let him take to himself what he means to give”; in other words, each is to bring to the assembly what they have determined “privately” to give. But there is very little linguistic warrant for such a suggestion, not to mention that the participle translated “saving it up” implies that “each person” is to store up what is set aside until the designated time. The phrase “by oneself” almost certainly means “at home.”
If so, why then does Paul mention “on the first day of every week”? Traditionally this has been one of three NT texts that have been used to support these early Gentile believers’ use of Sunday, rather than the Jewish Sabbath, as their day of worship. Although one should not assert more than such a passing reference allows, several observations are in order: (1) The fact that Paul makes such a reference at all implies that there is some significance to their setting money aside on this day rather than, for example, “once a week.” (2) Although that significance may have been only a matter of when people were paid, it seems far more likely that it is a weekly reckoning with religious significance, especially since it reflects the Jewish tradition of counting days with reference to the Sabbath. (3) This language is well remembered in the gospel traditions in relationship to the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. The fixed place of this terminology in those narratives implies that it had more than simply historical interest for the early church. This is verified further by the note in Luke’s account (Acts 20:7), which implies most strongly that Paul and the others waited in Troas until the “first day of the week” precisely because that is when the Christians gathered for the breaking of bread, that is, their meal in honor of the Lord.
Therefore, and despite sabbatarians to the contrary, all of this together implies that this is the day when believers from a very early time gathered for their specifically Christian celebration of worship, which included the Lord’s Table. Thus, even though they were not necessarily to bring their gift to the assembly on this day, it was the fact that this day marked for them the specifically Christian day in their week that probably made it convenient for Paul to note it as the time for them to remember the poor among the brothers and sisters in Jerusalem.
What is less clear is the clause that apparently is intended to refer to the amount set aside each week. The NIV translates, “in keeping with your income.” But that is probably a bit too modern, especially for a culture where a number of the community were slaves and had no “income.” More likely it is intentionally ambiguous and does not mean that each should lay aside all their “profits,” which a literal rendering of the Greek text would allow, but that in accordance with “whatever success or prosperity may have come their way that week,” each should set aside something for this collection. There is no hint of a tithe or proportionate giving; the gift is simply to be related to their ability from week to week as God has prospered them.
The purpose of this arrangement is simple: “so that when I come no collections will have to be made.” Although he does not say as much, such a plan will also ensure a greater gift than a single collection at the time of his arrival. His concern, therefore, seems to be in part that by their weekly setting aside from their “success” of that week, there will be a sum worth the effort of sending people all the way to Jerusalem, which is the matter he speaks to next.
3 That Paul is anticipating a sizable gift is to be seen in this further explanation as to how the gift will get to Jerusalem. When Paul himself arrives, he will write “letters of introduction” for those whom the Corinthians themselves approve to “bear your gift [charis] to Jerusalem.” This is now the second clear reference to his own proposed visit (cf. 4:18–21), the details of which will be spelled out in the next paragraph (vv. 5–9). Such letters of introduction, or commendation, were a regular part of business dealings in antiquity. Helpful examples may be found elsewhere in the NT in (Acts 15:23–29, Rom. 16:1–2, and esp. 2 Cor. 8:16–24), where the final paragraphs function as such a letter.
What is significant is that Paul had determined to send along representatives of the congregations, probably from key churches in larger geographical areas, to accompany the gifts. A number of reasons, partly practical and partly theological, probably lay behind this decision. On the one hand, they would probably be carrying a considerable sum—all in coin!—and there is some safety in numbers. At the same time it would be a practical way of assuring the various churches of the basic integrity of the entire enterprise. On the other hand, surely for Paul the personal representation would be as important as the gifts themselves in his greater concern for the unity of the church. Much more than in modern Western cultures real life in ancient cultures often happened at the anecdotal level; and living persons accompanying such gifts carry the stories of “giver” and “recipient” alike, thus giving a sense of genuine tangibility to such gifts. In any case, whether Paul went along or not, representatives from the church(es) would “bear your gracious gift.”
4 At this stage of the planning, Paul is uncertain as to whether he will also go to Jerusalem with the gift. His own present hesitation is found in the words “if it seems advisable for me to go also.” The word translated “advisable” also bears the meaning “worthy.” Some, therefore, have felt inclined to see the gift as the subject of the clause, implying that if the gift is worthy of it, that is, an amount substantial enough, then Paul might himself accompany it. But the grammar does not seem to allow such a view; rather, the question is one of appropriateness. What is not clear is, “appropriate” or “advisable” from whose perspective? Some think, from the Corinthians’; hence, “if it is your mind that I should go.” More likely the clause is much more ambiguous and reflects Paul’s own concerns about his ministry in the West and perhaps his reception in Jerusalem (cf. Rom. 15:23 and 31). In any case, by the time he wrote his next (preserved) letter to this community of believers, he had decided to accompany the gift (2 Cor. 1:16; cf. Rom. 15:25) and have the brothers accompany him.
What happens next with regard to this collection lies properly beyond the bounds of this commentary, since it is a matter for 2 Corinthians and Romans. But two points may be noted. First, the evidence of his letter to the believers in Rome (15:26–27) makes it clear that the collection from this church was finally received, and according to Paul, “they were pleased to do it.” Second, by what he wrote in his next (preserved) letter to this church (2 Cor. 8:10–11), they had made a good beginning but had failed to follow through with it. Hence Titus was dispatched—twice—to help them bring it to completion. Their reluctance in the meantime is almost certainly the result of the crisis brought about by Paul’s sudden, “painful” visit noted in his next letter (2 Cor. 2:1), which also caused the (second) change of travel plans explained twice in that letter (1:15–2:13 and 7:2–16). Most likely the proposed return note regarding that visit is when he intended to pick up the collection, but the visit had been so painful that, for understandable reasons, he went on instead to Ephesus from Macedonia without it, and in his place dispatched Titus with a letter. On their meeting again in Macedonia, Titus reported to him that things were basically better between him and the church in general, but the matter of the collection was strictly on hold. Hence in our 2 Corinthians he sends Titus and three others, part of whose purpose is to get the collection ready for Paul’s arrival. The evidence from Romans (chap. 15) is that, despite these momentary setbacks, the Corinthian contribution was finally collected.
Although this is not a primary text in the NT on Christian giving, at least in comparison with two passages in his next (preserved) letter to these believers (2 Cor. 8:1–15 or 9:6–15), something can still be learned here. The worthiness of the project itself and the proper theological motivation for giving must be found elsewhere. What is significant here is the very matter-of-fact way the issue is taken up. On a weekly basis they should set money aside, as the Lord has prospered them. No pressure, no gimmicks, no emotion. A need had to be met, and the Corinthians were capable of playing a role in it. In a day of highly visible campaigns for money on every side, there is something to be said for the more consistent, purposeful approach outlined here. Perhaps it also says something about the generosity Paul expected of those who were disciples of the Crucified One.
5After I go through Macedonia, I will come to you—for I will be going through Macedonia. 6Perhaps I will stay with you for a while, or even spend the winter, so that you can help me on my journey, wherever I go. 7For I do not want to see you now and make only a passing visit; I hope to spend some time with you, if the Lord permits. 8But I will stay on at Ephesus until Pentecost, 9because a great door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many who oppose me.
10If Timothy comes, see to it that he has nothing to fear while he is with you, for he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am. 11No one, then, should treat him with contempt. Send him on his way in peace so that he may return to me. I am expecting him along with the brothers.
Much earlier in the letter, in the heat of an argument with the Corinthians over his authority (4:17, 18–21), Paul announced that Timothy had been dispatched to Corinth to remind them of his way of life in the Lord and that he himself would be coming “very soon.” Now the mention of his coming to make the final arrangements for their collection to be sent to Jerusalem (vv. 3–4) leads Paul to explain his travel plans in getting there, and to add a word about the coming of Timothy and their reception of him. Such travel information regularly appears in his letters either about himself (Rom. 15:22–33; Phil. 2:24; Phlm. 22; Tit. 3:12) or about his companions (Phil. 2:19–30).
The information in this case is straightforward. He is currently in Ephesus (vv. 8–9), where he plans to stay at least until Pentecost. That means he is probably writing in early spring. According to these plans he would not take the direct route (by sea; v. 7), but would come by way of Macedonia (v. 5), where he would apparently spend the better part of summer and early fall, since he hopes to winter in Corinth. Although this fits precisely with the picture in Luke’s account (Acts 20:1–3), the latter can scarcely be referring to the realization of these present plans. Indeed, according to what is said plainly in his next letter to them (2 Cor. 1:15–2:4), Paul did exactly the opposite of this. Apparently he paid them a quick visit by sea, hoping that they would send him on his way to Macedonia; from Macedonia he would return to Corinth so that they would also send him on his way to Jerusalem (2 Cor. 1:15–16). But this brief visit developed into a major crisis in Paul’s relationship with this church, which took at least two more letters and two visits from Titus to straighten out.
The straightforward way in which Paul gives his own plans offers no hint that there is some tension between him and them on this matter. To be sure, this letter reflects such tensions in nearly every section; but Paul probably also expects this letter to function in his place and prepare the way for his own coming—hence his somewhat relaxed attitude as to his own coming. But those very tensions fill him with more than just a little anxiety about Timothy and their reception of him (vv. 10–11). Given the nature of the abuse Paul himself apparently has been taking from some quarters in the church, and given Timothy’s own apparently less than forceful personal mien, he urges them to take Timothy in as they would the apostle himself. Of this visit we know nothing more, not even whether it materialized.
5 Paul begins the outline of his itinerary by telling them that he is taking the overland route through Macedonia. Although these churches (at least Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea) by and large seem to have maintained his ways, it has been several years since he has visited them, so at the moment he apparently plans to spend late spring and summer among them. The language “pass through” implies not that he intends simply to be there overnight, as it were, but that he is on a tour of supervision through these various churches. The added “for I will be going through Macedonia” is probably intended to emphasize his desire both to return to these churches and to let the Corinthians know that the “very soon” much earlier in the letter (4:19) has this degree of delay to it.
6–7 These two sentences together stress Paul’s eagerness to spend considerable time among them. It may be that lying behind this is some concern as to how he will find the church when he comes and whether it may take some time for him to square away the breakdown in relationships between him and them. But if so, we must conjecture it from what else we know from this letter. The sentences themselves reflect a straightforward desire, couched in terms of just enough uncertainty to preclude its being a promise. The hope is first expressed as “Perhaps I will stay with you awhile, or even spend the winter.” Given the problems of travel during winter and the open-ended nature of his going to Macedonia, this probably reflects nothing more than a generally realistic hope of how things very well could turn out.
But the purpose of his spending time turns out to be something of a surprise: “so that you can help me on my journey, wherever I go.” The “wherever I go” corroborates the doubt expressed above (v. 4) as to his destination following Corinth. Most likely lying behind this hesitation is the double yearning to take the collection to Jerusalem (in the east) and to visit Rome (in the west). The verb “help me on my journey” is a technical one for providing a person with food, money, and traveling companions so as to ensure a safe and successful arrival at their destination. It seems to be a key means of Christian hospitality in antiquity. In light of the tensions over his refusal to accept monetary support while among them (see on chap. 9), this has all the earmarks of being a peace offering on this matter. Although he has refused to take money while with them so that his gospel might be offered “free of charge” (9:18), he now offers them the opportunity to assist him on his further journeys, so that in this way they, too, may have a share in his ministry.
The next sentence (v. 7) begins with an explanatory “for,” indicating his sense of need to elaborate on this concern to spend time with them. Hence he simply repeats this dimension of the preceding sentence in new words. He doesn’t want to see them “now” because he intends to go to Macedonia (v. 5), and that would mean to “make only a passing visit.” Rather, he repeats, he hopes to spend some time with them, but this time he qualifies, “if the Lord permits” (cf. 4:19). As always, Paul’s own plans are ultimately subject to Christ.
8–9 Having first explained his determination to go to Macedonia (v. 5), and then his desire to spend considerable time in Corinth (vv. 6–7), Paul now offers a final word about the present situation in Ephesus. He plans to “stay on” there “until Pentecost.” This latter is an especially intriguing note, given that both the Ephesian and Corinthian churches were predominantly Gentile. Minimally, it is a reflection of Paul’s Jewish heritage in which, just as the week is divided by days from the Sabbath (v. 2), so the year is divided by the annual feasts. Therefore, it does not necessarily imply that he and the churches kept this feast, but that it is a convenient time reference to a period in mid-spring. On the other hand, such a casual mention of it in this way (cf. Acts 20:16) may suggest that the church, including its now Gentile believers, very early saw Christian significance to this feast, probably as a result of the birth of the church on the Day of Pentecost.
Some have suggested on the basis of this reference and the allusion to Christ as the Paschal lamb earlier on (5:7), that the present letter must have been written near Passover/Easter. That may well be, but it could just as easily have been before, as after, Easter. Although “Pentecost” technically refers to the “feast of fifty days” that followed Passover, it came to be used as a shortened form for “the day of Pentecost,” the celebration of the fiftieth day. Most likely that is what Paul is here referring to.
Paul concludes this short narrative of his change of plans by explaining why he intends to stay on for a while longer in Ephesus: On the one hand, “a great door for effective work has opened to me,” while on the other hand, “there are many who oppose me.” In a sense these two sentences describe Paul’s lifelong labors as a missionary of the gospel. Since no specifics are given here and the material in Acts cannot be dated, one properly hesitates to identify any of this with the latter material. Nonetheless, some significant correspondences should be noted. According to Luke’s account (Acts 19:22), Paul had already sent Timothy on ahead of him—although Luke has probably telescoped a bit the account of Paul’s plans in his preceding sentence. Furthermore, Paul’s imagery does coincide with the picture Luke portrays of the considerable success of Paul’s mission in this city that finally brought about the conflict with the hawkers of souvenirs at the temple of Artemis (Acts 19:23–41). It is certainly possible, therefore, and especially so in light of his earlier having fought “wild beasts in Ephesus” (1 Cor. 15:32), that at the time this letter was written Paul was fully anticipating a ruckus similar to that which Demetrius would finally instigate. In any case, these passages together give a clear picture of opposition to the gospel from outsiders. That it might have come in this case from pagan religion should offer no surprises.
10–11 From his own travel plans and the momentary reflection on the opposition, Paul is reminded of Timothy and the likelihood that he will be arriving in Corinth at some point along the way. Earlier in the letter (4:17) Paul explicitly said that he had sent Timothy to them. The protasis (“if” clause) of this conditional clause, therefore, probably does not intend to imply doubt as to whether he would come or not. Rather, it expresses uncertainty as to his actual time of arrival; and in any case, given the nature of travel in antiquity, it also allows for the proper hesitation as to the event itself. Thus, Paul probably means, “whenever Timothy comes.” There seems to be little question that he expected him eventually to come.
What is of interest, however, is Paul’s concern for Timothy’s reception. If there have not been many overt hints of the tensions between Paul and this church in the preceding travel plans, these sentences about Timothy bring that issue back into focus, especially so in light of the fact that Timothy worked with Paul in the founding of this church for well over a year. Why, then, should Paul fear that an old friend might not be well received? Most likely (1) because he knew that the sentiment against himself in this church was strong indeed and that it would almost certainly overflow toward Timothy, and (2) because Timothy had been specifically dispatched to “remind them of Paul’s way of life in Christ Jesus” (4:17). Thus, he urges that they “see to it that he has nothing to fear while he is with you.” The very fact that such a strong warning is issued is evidence enough of Paul’s own concern.
The second clause is intended to put the first into perspective: “For he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am.” That is, they are to treat Timothy as one who is there in Paul’s place, ministering in Paul’s stead. But a word that would ordinarily be one of commendation and security may not be so in this case, so Paul adds a further warning: “No one, then, should treat him with contempt.” Again it is difficult to find a reason for such a word unless Paul was fearful that the contempt some of them have for him will spill over onto his younger colleague.
Since Timothy would be coming as Paul’s personal delegate, he asks the community to afford him the same treatment he hoped to receive from them himself (v. 6), namely that they “send him on his way in peace.” The addition “in peace” probably reflects the traditional Jewish shalom; thus he wants them to provide for Timothy’s needs so that he may return to Paul and be sent on his way with the traditional blessing of “peace.” All of this “so that he may return to me,” although there is no hint here as to whether this means in Ephesus or Macedonia.
Also unclear is what is intended by “along with the brothers.” In the Greek text this could mean “I, along with the brothers, am expecting him.” Those who take this position usually consider it to refer to the same brothers mentioned in the following explanation regarding Apollos, and therefore to the three Corinthians mentioned a bit later (v. 17). But that makes very little sense, since if they wait for Timothy to return before this letter is sent, why say it at all—unless one also wants to argue that this letter was sent back to Corinth without these three men, which is most highly unlikely. On the other hand, those who take it to refer to “brothers” who are expected to come with Timothy are equally at a loss. In Luke’s account (Acts 19:22) Erastus is said to accompany Paul. Does this reference include some others as well whom Luke fails to mention, who accompanied Timothy during the entire trip? If so, which seems likely, then the concern for Timothy’s own treatment stands out the more. If not, then we have absolutely no way of knowing to whom Paul is referring.
One is left to wonder how this visit by Timothy turned out, since there is no further mention of it in Paul’s letters. In any case, two things are certain. First, shortly after this letter Paul goes absolutely contrary to the plans here laid out and pays a sudden, unexpected visit to Corinth. Why he did so is purely a matter of conjecture, but that he should so radically alter his plans suggests that perhaps the return of Timothy gave him reason for even greater alarm with regard to this church. The fact that the visit turned out to be such a blowup, apparently under the leadership of one person in particular, and that the visit was so painful for Paul that he refused to return for the time being, seems to give this suggestion some merit. Second, what Paul did do was to send Titus back to Corinth instead of either himself or Timothy (2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6–7). At some point in the near future, and for reasons not fully available to us, neither of them (Paul or Timothy) is a persona grata to the community; it also means that Titus must have been a person of extraordinary grace. This, at least, is one viable attempt to make some sense of these very fragmentary pieces of historical data.