but now I go to Jerusalem, ministering to the saints;
Near the end of Romans, Paul lays out his travel plans: Rome, then Spain. But he must go the other way first, to Jerusalem with money — which raises three questions: what was this service, why did an apostle carry it himself, and was the journey wise?
The trip west had to wait. Believers in Jerusalem were in hardship, and Paul meant to bring them help himself.
In the meantime he had another form of ministry to fulfil. There were saints at Jerusalem in poverty. The believers in Macedonia and Achaia were glad to make a contribution for them, and Paul was anxious to take it to Jerusalem... When he had finished this service, Paul planned to visit the saints at Rome.
The need had two roots, and the givers were not the wealthy ones.
The Philippians were poor compared with the Corinthians, yet they were far more liberal. They talked less and gave more. The Acts of the Apostles gives two explanations of how the need arose. There was a famine in those days. Sharing their goods at the beginning had also left the believers in Jerusalem especially poor. Yet their poverty gave the occasion for cementing practical bonds of Christian fellowship between Gentile and Jew.
Paul does not treat this money as charity. He treats it as something owed.
Meanwhile he had an errand of compassion in hand for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem. The saints of Macedonia and Achaia had raised money to help their brothers and sisters. The apostle treats this as a debt of love rather than as a simple outflow of love. If the Gentiles shared in the spiritual privileges of the Jews, ought they not to remember their poor saints in material things?
Paul carried the money himself. Commentators read that choice in two ways. One sees an apostle who thought no service too small:
The apostle did not think a deacon's service beneath him. He was inspired to write of it all for our building up, sure of a fullness of Christ's blessing for the saints at Rome when he came.
Another looks at what pulled Paul toward Jerusalem:
We see that his heart turns to the Jews; they occupied his thoughts. He wanted to put the seal of performance on the grace this collection showed. Yet he was preoccupied with them as Jews, as those who had a claim. Perhaps this was a mixed feeling in one who was anxious to show that he did not forget them; for, in fact, he loved his nation. This service belonged properly to a deacon. Pleasing as it might be, we have to learn whether he was at the height of his mission as apostle in carrying it out.
Commentators differ here, and none treat it as settled. One sets the journey beside the warnings Paul was given, and finds his love for Israel blinding him to them:
The apostle is first told, plainly and unmistakably, not to go to Jerusalem. Then he is shown what going will cost him... Despite it all, the apostle sees nothing of the kind. There is a veil over his eyes, and it is a very solemn one. It is the veil of an impulse that holds him — his love for Israel, which he himself has recorded for us in the letter to the Romans. He wrote that letter with this very journey in view.
Another writer leaves the question open and looks at what came of the prayer Paul asked for.
Paul clearly considered this collection a very important matter, and he insisted on carrying the money himself. He was quite aware of the danger he ran... Whether he was right to go to Jerusalem has been much discussed. We need not try to answer that here. But we should note this: God answered the prayer he asked the Roman saints to join him in, though not in the way he hoped. He was delivered, but not as a free man.
Paul did reach Rome — in chains, not as the free traveller of these verses.
His circumstances were very different from the ones he had pictured when he wrote ahead about what he planned to do. But he did come to them with a certain measure of joy by the will of God, and "the fullness of the blessing of Christ" marked him. God's hand was still over him.
- Need. Famine and the early sharing of goods left the believers in Jerusalem poor. Their hardship became an opening for others to give.
- Gift. The money came from Macedonia and Achaia, and the poorer givers gave the most — they talked less and gave more.
- Debt. Paul treats the money as a debt of love. Those who received spiritual things owe material things in return.
- Bond. The collection cemented practical fellowship between Gentile and Jew. Paul knew the danger and still insisted on carrying the money himself.
- Result. Commentators still debate whether the journey was wise. God answered his prayer through imprisonment, and he reached Rome in the fullness of the blessing of Christ.
for Macedonia and Achaia have been well pleased to make a certain contribution for the poor of the saints who [are] in Jerusalem.
Paul is about to leave for Jerusalem with money raised in the churches of Greece, and he tells the Christians in Rome about it. Two questions follow: why were the believers in Jerusalem poor, and why did churches hundreds of miles away want to help?
Macedonia and Achaia were the two Roman provinces that together made up Greece. The order in which Paul names them is not accidental. The record of the early church also explains why the need arose.
We find a reference to this collection for the saints in 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, and again at much greater length in 2 Corinthians 8 and 9. If you read those passages, you can see at once why the Apostle here places Macedonia before Achaia. The Philippians were poor compared with the Corinthians, yet they were far more generous. They talked less and gave more. The Acts of the Apostles gives two reasons for the need. There was a famine in those days (Acts 11:27-30). The believers in Jerusalem had also grown especially poor through the "Christian communism" they practised at the beginning (Acts 2:44-45).
The word behind "contribution" is one the New Testament usually uses for something else.
The word "koinonia" means to share a thing in common. The New Testament translates it nineteen times — twelve times as "Fellowship," four times as "Communion," and once each as "Communication," "Contribution," "Distribution."
The words "it pleased them" set a principle for Christian giving. Liberty rules out force, but it does not cancel what is owed.
If you take the trouble to read Romans 15:26, you will find that "Macedonia and Achaia have been pleased to make some contribution for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem." So on this point, the principle recognised in the word of God is the full liberty of the saints, and under certain aspects their moral obligation. "It pleased them." So when it pleases us, we do it, often acknowledging that it is an obligation. If you wish to see the spirit in which the thing was done, you can read 2 Corinthians 8 where the apostle says he does not speak this as a command.
So why did the Greeks owe anything? Paul points to what they had already received.
Meanwhile he was on an errand of compassion for the poor among the saints at Jerusalem. Long before this, the Romans had divided Greece into the two provinces of Macedonia and Achaia. The saints there had raised money to help their brothers. The apostle treats this as a debt of love rather than as love simply flowing out. If the Gentiles shared in the spiritual privileges of the Jews, should they not remember their poor saints in material things? They were pleased, he repeats, but they are their debtors.
The gift did more than relieve hunger. It worked against a split that was opening in the early church.
In those days Jew and Gentile tended strongly to fall apart, and teachers from Jerusalem who pressed the law of Moses made the split worse by their scheming. So Paul clearly saw this collection as very important, and he insisted on carrying the money himself. He knew well the danger he was running. Verses 30 and 31 of this chapter show that he sensed trouble coming.
Commentators differ. One leaves the question open and looks instead at how the journey ended.
Whether he was really right in going to Jerusalem has been a much discussed question. We need not try to answer it here. But note that God answered the prayer Paul asked the Roman Christians to join in, though not in the way he hoped. He was delivered, but not as a free man. His imprisonment by Caesar's officers delivered him from his persecutors.
Another writer reads Paul's silence about any spiritual motive as telling.
No doubt it was a sweet testimony of affection and unity — so valuable at the time. Yet we may be sure that this was not all that moved Paul's heart. He has already told us (Rom. 10:1) of his deep longing for Israel's salvation... Why then does he not speak of it here? Can it be that he mentions no spiritual reason for going because he had a sense that it would bear no spiritual fruit? Indeed, we know from elsewhere that he did not have the direct leading of the Spirit of God to go to Jerusalem — in fact the Spirit warned him not to go. Another brother could just as well have carried this practical service to the poor saints.
- Debt — Spiritual blessing came out of Jerusalem to Greece. So Paul treats the money going back as a debt of love, not just love overflowing.
- Pleasure — No one ordered the debt paid. "It pleased them" — full liberty, with moral obligation beside it.
- Sharing — The word translated "contribution" is the word for fellowship. The gift was shared life, not charity from a distance.
- Bond — Jew and Gentile were pulling apart. This collection tied them together, and Paul carried it himself.
- Cost — He knew the danger and asked for prayer. God answered, but delivered him as a prisoner, not a free man.