We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2009
1 E.g., Michel, O., Der Brief an die Römer (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 5., bearbeitete Auflage, 1977) 461, 464Google Scholar n. 9; Cranfield, C. E. B., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1979) 772Google Scholar; Dunn, J. D. G., Romans 9–16 (Dallas: Word, 1988) 875.Google Scholar
2 Seesemann, H., Der Begriff ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ im Neuen Testament (Gieβen: Alfred Töpelmann, 1933) 29Google Scholar. Seesemann is followed by Hauck, F., ‘κοινός κτλ.’, TWNT 3 (1938) 809 n. 738Google Scholar; and Nickle, K. P., The Collection: A Study in Paul's Strategy (London: SCM, 1966) 124 n. 204.Google Scholar
3 E.g., Dunn, Romans, 875; Morris, L., The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988) 520Google Scholar n. 129; cf. Bauer, Walter, ‘κοινωνία’, Griechisch-deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frühchristlichen Literatur (6., völlig neu bearb. Auflage; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1988)Google Scholar paragraph 3.
4 Bauer, ‘‘κοινωνία’, para. 1.
5 Substantially the same alternative translation is offered by Bauer as far back as the second edition of his Wörterbuch (1928): ‘sie haben sich vorgenommen, e. Art engen Verhältnisses herzustellen zu d. Armen’ (paragraph 1). Yet, to our knowledge only Keck mentions the rendering, calling it ‘a masterpiece of ambiguity’ (Keck, L. E., ‘The Poor among the Saints in Jerusalem’, ZNW 66 [1965] 119Google Scholar n. 65). Likewise none of the major translations even inform the reader of any alternative rendering.
6 Dunn, Romans, 875.
7 ‘Κοινωνία’, Liddell, H. G., Scott, R. and Jones, H. S., A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968) 970Google Scholar, paragraph III.1; cf. Rostowzew, M., ‘Die Domäne von Pogla’, Jahreshefte des österreichischen archäologischen Instituts in Wien 4 (1900) Beiblatt 37–46Google Scholar. I am indebted to R. Herrmann for his insightful comments on this inscription.
8 Rostowzew, ‘Die Domäne’, 39.
9 Cf. Phil 4.18; Pol. Phil. 4.3; Herm. Sim. 5.3.3, 7–8; 2 Clem. 16.4. On the spiritualization of sacrifice see Ferguson, E., ‘Spiritual Sacrifice in Early Christianity and Its Environment’, ANRW 2.23.2 (ed. W. Haase, 1980) 1151–89.Google Scholar
10 E.g., Lucian Abd. 25. Also ‘to do good’ (εὖ ποιεῖν) often refers to the social act of benefiting another (cf. Mark 14.7; Arist. Eth. Nic. 1120a13, 1124b10, 1162a6; Plato Resp. 332D; Xen. Mem. 2.3.8; M. Ant. 7.73).
11 Lane, William L., Hebrews 9–13 (Dallas: Word, 1991) 552.Google Scholar
12 Wilckens, U., Der Brief an die Römer (3 vols., Zürich: Benziger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1978–82) 3.125Google Scholar; Cranfield, Romans, 772; Dunn, Romans, 875.
13 Betz, H. D., 2 Corinthians 8 and 9 (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 116Google Scholar; Martin, R. P., 2 Corinthians (Waco: Word, 1986) 292.Google Scholar For a contrary view see Karl Prümm, Diakonia Pneumatos. Theologie des zweiten Korintherbriefes. Zweiter Teil: Das christliches Werk. Die apostolische Macht (Rome: Herder, 1962) 40–3.Google Scholar
14 Contra Nickle, Collection, 124 n. 204; following Seesemann, ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ, 28, 67 and Hauck, ‘κοινός κτλ.’, 809.
15 Cf. κοινωνίαν ργαζόμενον, Plut. Mor. 957a.
16 See, e.g., Polyb. 21.30.4; Plut. Thes. 30.2; Rom. 23.5; 25.4; Sol. 5.1–2; Josephus AJ 5.55; 7.107; 12.414; 13.259, 269; 14.10; BJ 1.38.
17 No social significance is mentioned by Cranfield, Dunn, Käsemann, Keck, Michel, Morris, Wilckens, Zeller, Ziesler, Nickle, Seesemann or Georgi. On aspects of social reciprocity see, e.g., Bolkestein, H., Wohltätigkeit und Armenpflege in vorchristlichen Altertum (Utrecht: Oosthoek, 1939)Google Scholar; Mott, S. C., ‘The Power of Giving and Receiving: Reciprocity in Hellenistic Benevolence’, Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation (ed. Hawthorne, G. F.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975) 60–72.Google Scholar
18 Marshall, Peter, Enmity in Corinth: Social Conventions in Paul's Relations with the Corinthians (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1987)Google Scholar. Following the work of Marshall see, e.g., Stowers, S. K., ‘Friends and Enemies in the Politics of Heaven: Reading Theology in Philippians’, Pauline Theology 1: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Bassler, Jouette M.; Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1991) 105–21.Google Scholar
19 Motto, A. L., Seneca Sourcebook: A Guide to the Thought of Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1970) 34Google Scholar. Unless otherwise noted, all citations from Seneca are taken from De Beneficiis.
20 Motto, Seneca Sourcebook, 89.
21 E.g., Thuc. 2.40; Dio Cass. 48.16.3, Arr. Epict. Diss. 2.22.34, Plut. Sull. 3.1.
22 R. Bogaert, ‘Geld’, RAC 9.839; cf. Ar. Vesp. 606–7; Soph. Fr. 85; Andoc. Or. 4.15; and see the examples of φιλίαν ποιήσασθαι cited above.
23 See, e.g., Käsemann, , An die Römer (4., durchgesehene Auflage; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1980) 385Google Scholar; Cranfield, Romans, 773. We note that mention of the collection as a debt of thanks is lacking in Dodd, Dunn, Michel, Morris and Schlier.
24 On the concept of gratitude see Kraft, P., ‘Gratus Animus (Dankbarkeit)’, RAC 12.733–52.Google Scholar
25 Conzelmann, , ‘εὐχαριστέω κτλ.’, TWNT 9 (1973) 397.Google Scholar
26 Baur, F. C., ‘Beiträge zur Erklärung der Korintherbriefe’, Theologische Jahrbücher 9 (1850) 81–2Google Scholar; Nickle, Collection, 119, 122 n. 188, 124; Betz, 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, 123–4; Martin, 2 Corinthians, 251, 257.
27 Dunn, Romans, 879; Wedderburn, A. J. M., The Reasons for Romans (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1988) 41.Google Scholar
28 Achtemeier, Paul J., Romans (Atlanta: John Knox, 1985) 230–1.Google Scholar
29 This relationship was not a societas (contra Sampley, J. P., Pauline Partnership in Christ [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980]Google Scholar esp. 15, 72). For a response to Sampley see the author's forthcoming dissertation: Social Reciprocity in Paul: Aspects of Greco-Roman Social Convention in Philippians 4 and Selected Pauline Texts (Ph.D., King's College London).Google Scholar
30 Contra Seesemann, ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ, 74. See O'Brien, P. T., ‘The Importance of the Gospel in Philippians’, God Who Is Rich in Mercy (ed. O'Brien, Peter T. and Peterson, David G.; Homebush West, Australia: Lancer, 1986) 213–33.Google Scholar
31 Marshall, Enmity, 163. See also his discussion of Phil 4.15 (Enmity, 157–64).
32 E.g., Arr. Epict. Diss. 2.9.12; Arist. Eth. Nic. 1119b25; Plato Resp. 332a-b; Artem. 1.42; Philo Cherubim 122–3; Ps-Plato Axiochus 366b-c; Acts 20.35; cf. Cic. Amic. 8.26.
33 No explanation is offered by Cranfield, Dodd, Dunn, Michel, Morris, Schlier or Wilckens.
34 Käsemann, Römer, 385.
35 Hainz, J., ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ. ‘Kirche’ als Gemeinschaft bei Paulus (Regensburg: Pustet, 1982) 147.Google Scholar
