Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the assemblies of Galatia, so do *ye* do also.
Paul ends this letter with money: a fund the Gentile congregations were gathering for poor believers in Jerusalem. His wording assumes the readers already know of it, and points them to a pattern he had set elsewhere.
Money comes at the end of this letter, not at the start.
Paul's last direction in this letter is about the special collection then being made for poor believers in Judaea. Today in many religious circles money is so often the first topic. Here it is the last. Still it comes in, and he gives instructions of lasting value.
Critics have made the opening phrase of this verse an easy target.
Opponents of the gospel have said, with irony, that there is one point on which every warring sect agrees. They mean the words of Scripture, "Now concerning the collection" (1 Cor. 16:1). The irony bites because the appeals on behalf of Christian work are so frequent. But suppose each Christian gave to the Lord, and not just to a cause. Then there would be no difficulty in finding what the Lord's work needs.
These poor believers lived in Jerusalem. Their poverty had a history, and part of it was the price of their own generosity.
One cannot overlook how often the poor believers at Jerusalem were remembered. No doubt their circumstances gave them a special claim. Outward hardship was probably common, and persecution had left some widows and orphans. The believers there were not only very many. They alone, so far as we read, had sold their possessions and goods to give to all, as anyone had need... Later, poverty took hold there, partly through this surprising witness of unselfish love. And no one among the Gentile assemblies urged help for the believers in Judaea more than Paul did — not only during the great famine under Claudius Caesar, but from then on.
A collection can support those who teach, or relieve those in need. The Jerusalem fund was the second kind.
We may rightly have collections to meet the need of the Lord's gifted servants, from whom we receive spiritual help. But there are times when we also need collections for the poor of the flock. The special need of the believers at Jerusalem at that time was a case in point... From Jerusalem the gospel had gone out to the Gentiles. The Gentile converts had received spiritual things, so it was only right that they should give of their material things.
Paul tells Corinth to do what he had already told Galatia. One writer draws a wider principle from that.
It is untrue that the apostle left the assemblies without regulation, or that he regulated them differently. The dangers and the circumstances of Galatia were as unlike those of Corinth as anyone could imagine. Yet the apostle gave both the same directions. And not only on matters of the greatest importance — sound doctrine, holy discipline, and the institutions Christ gave to bear witness to Himself, so that the worship and public ways of the saints would give the same testimony everywhere. Here too, as we see, he gave the same direction even in the way they gave.
Some say the verse covers only a local matter of that day. The answer comes back as a question.
Now, someone may say that this passage referred to a certain local matter. On that view it gives no warrant for gatherings of Christians everywhere taking up collections every Lord's Day. Yes; but are there not poor believers now as there were then?
- Last. Money comes at the end of this letter, not the start. It still comes in, and it carries instructions of lasting value.
- Same. Paul gives Corinth the order he had already given Galatia. Different places, same rule — even for something as ordinary as giving.
- Poor. The believers in Jerusalem had sold what they owned to meet each other's need. Their own generosity is part of why they were now poor.
- Fair. The gospel went out from Jerusalem to the nations. Sending material help back was only right.
- Now. The question the verse leaves is simple: are there still poor believers to care for?
On [the] first of [the] week let each of you put by at home, laying up [in] whatever [degree] he may have prospered, that there may be no collections when I come.
The apostle closes this letter with money — a relief fund for believers in Judea who had fallen into need. In a few short clauses it settles who gives, when, how much, and from what motive.
One writer draws out two habits packed into the verse: regular giving, and giving measured against income.
The apostle's last direction in this letter concerns the special collection they were making at that time for poor believers in Judea. Today in many religious circles money is so often the first topic. Here it is the last. Still it comes in, and it carries instructions of lasting value. Verse 2 urges systematic giving instead of haphazard giving. Proportionate giving is also what God expects — in proportion to the prosperity which God Himself may have given. In Jewish days God fixed the proportion at one tenth. He has not fixed any proportion for us who are under grace. But be sure of this. We shall hear something pretty serious at the judgment seat if we fall below the standard the law set.
The day is not chosen at random. It is the day Christ rose and the day the disciples met.
In due time that day was to receive its fitting name, "the Lord's day" (Revelation 1:10). It marks out the Christian as the Sabbath marked out the Jew. What set it apart was not only the gathering of the saints, but the presence of the Lord among them. So it was again at the beginning of the following week. Later the Holy Spirit marks it out as the day when believers break bread (Acts 20:7), and when the needs of the holy poor rise up in remembrance before Him and them (1 Corinthians 16:2).
Each one is to "put something aside and store it up" — a private act. Older translations render it "lay by him in store." One writer reads both sides together: each settles the amount at home, then brings it when the assembly meets.
The collection for the saints was bound up with the solemn and gracious associations of the first, or resurrection, day. It was to go on regularly, not now and then. Each was to do it with conscience, according as he might be prospered. No one was to give under influence, or pressure, or haste, still less with indifference, or on merely human grounds… It seems that each was to lay aside at home what he judged right according to the means given. But the mention of the first of the week, or Lord's day, points to their bringing their contributions together when they met, as every disciple did, to break bread.
Scripture names no sum. It names the reach — each one — and the standard: how God has prospered that person during the week.
It is well to see that the Lord has not laid down the proportion to be set aside. He has not asked you to give half of your goods to the poor, as Zacchaeus was in the habit of doing, nor a tenth as in the case of Israel. But it appears to me from the words — "every one of you" — that each, however poor, is bound to give something. How much that is you must each settle for yourselves before the Lord… Say plainly, "Here is my sixpence, Lord; it is all I can spare You this week;" and then wait to see whether conscience cries "Shame" at you or not.
The last clause guards against one danger: giving stirred up by a visiting personality rather than by conscience.
He wished to avoid a special collection during his visit. It was not only, as it seems to us, that his time could be better used than in such service. He felt it was a matter for the Christian conscience and heart, not for influence of his own, still less for rivalry, or for the gusts of some passing impulse. What a contrast to getting a popular man to come and preach a moving sermon to work on people's feelings!
The verse commands the act. It says nothing about how the money should be collected.
Scripture is totally silent on the point. It simply says, "Let every one of you lay by him in store." It does not say where or how. It says that "every one" was to do it — and to do it according as God had prospered him… Now, if the Holy Spirit has not laid down any rule about the way of collecting for the poor, why should we?
- Day — Giving belongs to the first day of the week, the day Christ rose. Believers gather, and the needs of the poor come up before God with them.
- Everyone — The reach is total: "every one of you," so that even the poorest has something to bring, and no one is a spectator.
- Measure — Grace imposes no tenth. The standard is how God has prospered you that week, and you settle it alone with Him.
- Motive — Conscience, not pressure. Paul rules out a collection timed to his own arrival. No personality, rivalry, or passing impulse should do the work.
- Method — Scripture fixes the act and leaves the method free. Where God has made no rule, we should not invent one.
And when I am arrived, whomsoever ye shall approve, these I will send with letters to carry your bounty to Jerusalem
Near the end of a letter full of correction, Paul turns to money. Churches were gathering a gift for poor believers in Jerusalem, and this verse raises two questions that never go away: who picks the men who handle church funds, and what protects both the money and their good name?
Paul does not name the messengers. He leaves that choice to the Corinthians. One writer sees here the same wisdom the apostles showed in Acts 6.
The apostle was careful to leave no room for suspicion or for the look of wrong. So here he applies afresh the apostolic wisdom we see in Acts 6. The crowd chose their own administrators. They gave the funds, and they, not the apostles, chose the men they trusted to hand them out.
So not every servant of the church is appointed the same way.
The deacons are servants, and servants of the Church... It shows us the men who did the work of deacons being chosen by the churches, with the apostles wanting it that way. And it shows us elders appointed by the apostle or by his delegates, and by no one else.
Commentators differ over whose letters these are. Some say the Corinthians wrote them to approve their own men. Others say the letters were Paul's, given to the men the Corinthians had chosen.
But the letters were to be his, not theirs, as the King James Version wrongly has it... What sense would it make for them to approve by their letters when the apostle came? The Corinthians were to select whom they approved, and Paul, on arriving, would send them on with letters from himself.
Either way, the letters did the same job. The men did not arrive among strangers as unknowns carrying other people's money.
Paul was the natural person to carry the gift himself. He refused to do it alone.
Our God is above all things a God of order. He loves to see His people careful in all their ways, and especially where money is involved... Paul was glad to have a part in this work of grace, but he insisted on having companions, men the assemblies had chosen with care for the job.
That care was not fussiness. Paul knew what he was up against.
The apostle knew the enemy's tricks, and so he guards with care against suspicion and damaging hints. Sadly, think what ruin dishonest gain, the love of money, greed, which is idolatry, has caused in the professing church, and how much offence it has given to unbelievers.
The destination was not random. The believers there were poor, and the Gentiles owed them a debt.
In that city there were many believers who had suffered persecution, and there were likely many widows and orphans... The gospel had gone out from Jerusalem to the Gentiles. Since the Gentile converts had received spiritual things, it was only right that they should share their material things. The collection was to go on steadily, each one putting money aside as God had prospered him.
Letters like these were not just for this one collection. The habit worked both ways.
The early Christians made it their practice to give letters of commendation to believers who left them for churches where nobody knew them. They also asked the same of strangers who came to them for fellowship... Such letters guard against receiving false believers. They build up confidence and fellowship between churches.
But a letter is a servant, not a master. It can be twisted into the very opposite of its purpose.
It does real harm when something God uses for our mutual comfort gets twisted by rigid rule-keeping into a tool of spiritual torture — sometimes over a missing letter of commendation, or some similar detail left undone.
- Given — the money came from the Corinthians. Each one set it aside as God had prospered him, so it was theirs to direct.
- Chosen — because they gave it, they chose who would carry it. Apostles appointed elders; the churches picked the men who handled money.
- Sealed — the carriers travelled with letters that introduced them to believers who had never met them. Commentators differ over who wrote the letters.
- Guarded — Paul refused to travel alone with the gift. He knew the enemy's tricks, and what damage the love of money has done in the church.
- Delivered — the gift went to Jerusalem, where believers were poor after persecution. The gospel had gone out from them, so the Gentiles owed them material help.
and if it be suitable that *I* also should go, they shall go with me.
Paul ends this letter with practical matters, and the first is money — a relief fund the churches gathered for believers in Jerusalem. Verse 4 settles one open question: if Paul travelled to Jerusalem himself, the men chosen by the church would still go with him.
Some read the clause to mean that the size of the gift settled whether Paul went. One commentator rejects that reading.
Many draw out the meaning, "if the occasion, or the size of the collection, warrants an apostolic mission to carry it." But that sense, though possible in grammar, seems to me unworthy — not only of the apostle, but even of the delegates. It is tolerable only because the begging habits of Christendom have lowered men... If it were suitable, then, that Paul also should go, the delegates should go with him. He would guard his services from all ground for reproach, providing for things honest, not only before the Lord, but also before men.
Paul does not name the carriers. He leaves that to the givers, and treats it as an old rule rather than a new one.
Here the apostle makes a fresh application of the wisdom we see in Acts 6. The whole company of believers chose their own administrators. They contributed the funds, and they, not the apostles, chose men in whom they had confidence to dispense them... Here, then, the apostle promises on his arrival to send with letters whomever they should approve to bring their bounty to Jerusalem.
The verse never has Paul carrying the gift alone. If he went, they went with him — and he kept that rule elsewhere too.
When money is in question, the apostles withdraw from taking that work on themselves. Later, Paul refused to handle the distribution of the offerings of the saints unless someone chosen by the churches worked alongside him. He would give no occasion, however small, for suspicion that could injure his ministry.
Such caution with money can look like weak faith.
This is not lack of faith. It is faith working by love. Such faith cuts off occasion from men, and walks with a pure conscience before God.
The shared journey was more than a safeguard. Paul wanted Corinthian hands to carry the Corinthian gift.
What the Corinthians sent must come from them, warm with their love, and handed over by their own messengers. This work needed more than a faithful discharge of trust. It needed real building up, through an exchange of brotherly kindness between the Greek and Jewish saints. He would gladly travel with their messengers, if that seemed fitting when the time came. Nothing lay closer to his heart than the pulling down of the barriers of prejudice on either side, and the practical union of those who were already one in Christ.
The believers waiting for this gift were poor for a reason. Part of it was their own earlier giving.
The believers there were very many. And there alone, so far as we read, had they sold their possessions and belongings to give to all, as anyone had need. There alone no one said that anything he owned was his own. They shared everything, so that no one was in want. But there, partly through this surprising testimony of unselfish love, poverty came later.
Paul had already told this church he took nothing from them for himself. That did not hold him back here.
Though Paul would accept nothing for himself from the Corinthians, he would still share with all his heart in their generosity toward the poor saints.
- Need — Jerusalem's believers were poor in part because they had once sold what they owned and shared it with all.
- Gift — The money was theirs, so the choice of carriers was theirs. Paul added his letters, and left the choice alone.
- Guard — He would not handle the fund alone. Faith working by love takes away any occasion for suspicion, honest before men as well as before the Lord.
- Company — If he went, they went with him. His own presence never replaced the church's messengers.
- Result — Greek hands carried a Greek gift to Jewish believers. That pulled down prejudice on both sides and showed the union of people already one in Christ.