1 Munck, Johannes, Paulus und die Heilsgeschichte (Acta Jutlandica 26:1; Teologisk serie 6; Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1954Google Scholar). This theory was anticipated in William Wrede's Paul (trans. Edward Lummis; London: Green, 1907).

2 By “mission,” I imply Martin Goodman's description of a “proselytizing mission”: “Those who approved of a proselytizing mission believed that, as members of a defined group, they should approve of those within their number who might choose to encourage outsiders not only to change their way of life but also to be incorporated within their group.” Mission and Conversion: Proselytizing in the Religious History of the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994) 4. As will become clear below, I conceive of Paul's mission as involving not only acts of proclaiming the gospel but also acts of community building and community maintenance. As will also be made clear below, acts of the latter variety are not always categorized as missionary tasks. However, I will support my position with reference to the great amount of attention that Paul devotes to tasks of establishing and nurturing congregations and to the emphasis Paul places on congregation membership for the salvation of the believer.

3 From this point forward, the “purpose problem” refers to the question of Paul's self-perceived purpose as a missionary.

4 However, scholars have made the most out of the ambiguity of τῶν ἑθνῶν in this verse. Some critics opt to read “the Gentiles,” while others understand Paul to mean the geographical area outside of Palestine. See Knox, John, “Romans 15:14–33 and Paul's Conception of His Apostolic Mission,” JBL 83 (1964) 1–11Google Scholar, at 2–3.

5 L. Peerbolte, J. Lietaert, Paul the Missionary (CBET 34; Louvain: Peeters, 2003) 206Google Scholar.

6 Throughout the article, I use “assembly”, “congregation,” and “association” interchangeably when referencing Christ-confessing communities. This is consistent with conclusions drawn by Harland, Philip A., Associations, Synagogues, and Congregations: Claiming a Place in Ancient Mediterranean Society (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 2003Google Scholar) 3:211–12.

7 Bultmann, Rudolf, Theology of the New Testament (2 vols.; London: SCM, 1952–1955) 306–8Google Scholar.

8 The purpose of Paul's mission is not given detailed consideration in several recent studies on elements of Paul's mission. See, for example, Meeks, Wayne A., The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1983Google Scholar); Lietaert Peerbolte, Paul; Schnabel, Eckhard J., Paul the Missionary: Realities, Strategies and Methods (Nottingham, U.K.: Apollos, 2008Google Scholar); Barnett, Paul, Paul: Missionary of Jesus (After Jesus 2; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2008Google Scholar); and Lopez, Davina C., Apostle to the Conquered: Reimagining Paul's Mission (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 2008Google Scholar).

9 Terence Donaldson, L., “‘Riches for the Gentiles' (Rom 11:12): Israel's Rejection and Paul's Gentile Mission,” JBL 112 (1993) 81–98Google Scholar.

10 Zoccali, Christopher, “‘And so all Israel will be saved': Competing Interpretations of Romans 11.26 in Pauline Scholarship,” JSNT 30 (2008) 289–318Google Scholar.

11 Knox, “Romans 15:14–33,” 1–11; and A. Das, Andrew, “Paul of Tarshish: Isaiah 66.19 and the Spanish Mission of Romans 15.24, 28,” NTS 54 (2008) 60–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Glad, Clarence, Paul and Philodemus: Adaptability in Epicurean and Early Christian Psychagogy (NTS 81; Leiden: Brill, 1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Downing, F. Gerald, Cynics, Paul and the Pauline Churches: Cynics and Christian Origins II (London: Routledge, 1998CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Engberg-Pedersen, Troels, Paul and the Stoics (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000)Google Scholar; and Malherbe, Abraham, Paul and the Popular Philosophers (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1989Google Scholar).

13 Lietaert Peerbolte, Paul; and Boring, M. Eugene, The Continuing Voice of Jesus: Christian Prophecy and the Gospel Tradition (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1991Google Scholar).

14 Adolf von Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries (trans. James Moffatt; 2 vols.; Theological Translation Library 19–20; New York: Putnam, 1908); Goodman, Mission; and Schnabel, Eckhard J., Early Christian Mission (2 vols.; Leicester, U.K.: Apollos, 2004Google Scholar).

15 I prefer to use “Judean” rather than “Jewish,” but in this review section I will use the latter in order to maintain the integrity of the works being reviewed. See Mason, Steve, “Jews, Judeans, Judaizing, Judaism: Problems of Categorization in Ancient History,” JSJ 38 (2007) 457–512Google Scholar.

16 Dieter Georgi elaborated upon Harnack's basic thesis in important ways. He suggested that the synagogue played a central role in Jewish proselytising efforts. Georgi presents several examples (e.g., Josephus, B.J. 8.45) of Gentiles being drawn to the synagogue, wherein they encounter interpretations of the Law. He also argued that Gentile missions competed with one another for adherents and that the first missionaries from the Jesus movement involved themselves in this competition as well. See Die Gegner des Paulus im 2 Korintherbrief. Studien zur religiösen Propaganda in der Spätantike (WMANT 11; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1964) 187–92, 205–13. Other scholars to follow Harnack's thesis include Leon, Harry J., Jews of Ancient Rome (Philadelphia: JPSA, 1960) 250–56Google Scholar; and Marcel Simon, Versus Israel: A Study of the Relations between Christians and Jews in the Roman Empire, 135–425 (trans. H. McKeating; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986).

17 However, certain prominent contributors to the debate detract from Goodman's characterization of Jewish proselytism in the first century. See Feldman, Louis H., Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World: Attitudes and Interactions from Alexander to Justinian (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1993Google Scholar); Georgi, Dieter, “The Early Church: Internal Jewish Migration or New Religion?” HTR 88 (1995) 35–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Steve Mason, “The Contra Apionem in Social and Literary Context: An Invitation to Judean Philosophy,” in Religious Rivalries in the Early Roman Empire and the Rise of Christianity (ed. Leif Vaage; Studies in Christianity and Judaism 18; Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfred Laurier, 2006) 139–73.

18 Goodman, Mission, 105.

19 For details on the distinction between these four kinds of endeavors, see ibid., 1–7.

20 Ibid., 5.

21 Ibid., 7.

22 Two recent studies that build upon Goodman's work, but that deal with entirely different research questions, are Lietaert Peerbolte, Paul; and Terence L. Donaldson, “‘The Field God Has Assigned': Geography and Mission in Paul,” in Vaage, Religious Rivalries, 109–38.

23 Lietaert Peerbolte, Paul, 1–6, 253.

24 Munck, Johannes, Paul and the Salvation of Mankind (trans. Frank Clarke; London: SCM, 1959) 39–40Google Scholar.

25 Many scholars interpret “all Israel” (πᾶϛ Ἰσραὴλ) as a reference to the Israelites as a historical nation and a corporate whole. See Munck, Johannes, Christ and Israel: An Interpretation of Romans 9–11 (trans. Ingeborg Nixon; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967) 131–38Google Scholar; Cranfield, Charles E. B., The Epistle to the Romans (2 vols.; ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979) 572–79Google Scholar; Sanders, E. P., Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985) 194Google Scholar; Otfried Hofius, “‘All Israel will be saved': Divine Salvation and Israel's Deliverance in Romans 9–11,” in The Church and Israel: Romans 9-11; The 1989 Frederick Neumann Symposium on the Theological Interpretation of Scripture (ed. Daniel L. Migliore; The Princeton Seminary Bulletin Supplementary Issue 1; Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Theological Seminary, 1990) 19-39; Stuhlmacher, Peter, Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (trans. Scott J. Hafemann; Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox, 1994) 170–73Google Scholar; and Jewett, Robert, Romans (Hermeneia; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 2007) 694–706Google Scholar. Zoccali names this perspective the “eschatological miracle” interpretation (“‘And so all Israel will be saved,’” 290.) Recent scholarship, however, has afforded added credibility to a minority position that Zoccali calls the “total national elect” interpretation (Zoccali, see, “‘And so all Israel will be saved,’” 303–14; see also Ben L. Merkle, “Romans 11 and the Future of Ethnic Israel,” JETS 43 (2000) 709–22Google Scholar, esp. 711–21). For earlier articulations of this perspective, see Lenski, Richard H. C., The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (Columbus, Ohio: Wartburg, 1945) 723–28Google Scholar; and François Refoulé, ‘… Et ainsi tout Israel sera sauvés': Romans 11.25–32 (LD 117; Paris: Cerf, 1984) 181.

26 Munck, Salvation, 277–78.

27 Although Paul refers to his preaching activity specifically in this verse, Knox takes τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ to mean the apostle's work in general—establishing a sufficient number of assemblies and ensuring their “unity and solidarity” are two tasks included here (“Romans 15:14–33,” 1). This is an important insight. However, he seems to contradict this notion throughout his article by characterizing Paul's work to establish and nurture congregations as a relatively insignificant component of his ministry.

28 Knox, “Romans 15:14–33,” 2.

29 Ibid., 4.

30 Ibid., 4–5.

31 Ibid., 8–10: “[A]lthough Paul may have thought…that the preaching of the gospel to all the nations was a precondition of the eschaton…he did not think of himself as the only preacher to the nations or find for himself a place in God's plan quite so exalted as Cullmann and Munck assert…. We should assume that as he now moves farther west, he will continue to understand his own task as that of filling out, or thus ‘completing,' the preaching to the nations.”

32 Ibid., 6–7.

33 Ashcraft, Morris, “Paul's Understanding of his Apostleship,” RevExp 55 (1958) 411Google Scholar: “To Paul, it appears, fulfilling his role as an apostle meant that he was busy proclaiming the gospel.” See also, Schmithals, Walter, The Office of the Apostle in the Early Church (Nashville: Abingdon, 1969) 22–23Google Scholar.

34 Donaldson, “Riches for the Gentiles,” 92–93.

35 Ibid., 94 (italics in original). Donaldson then references intertextual support for the existence of the idea in Second Temple Judaism that the eschaton is delayed until Israel repents. We encounter this tradition in numerous texts. See T. Dan 6:4; T. Sim. 6:2–7; T. Jud. 23:5; As. Mos. 1:18; 2 Bar. 78:6–7; Apoc. Ab. 23:5; 4 Ezra 4:38–43; b. Sanh. 97b, 98a; and b. Šabb. 118b (Donaldson, “Riches for the Gentiles,” 95; and Dale Allison, C., “The Background of Romans 11:11–15 in Apocalyptic and Rabbinic Literature,” Studia Biblica et Theologica 10 [1980]Google Scholar 229).

36 For the notion that Gentile proselytes could join Israel's covenant with God, see 2 Bar. 30:4–5; 44:15; 51:6; 82:3–9; 4 Ezra 7:37; 8:56–58. For receptiveness towards proselytes see t. Sanh. 13.2; ‘Abod. Zar. 3b. See Donaldson, “Riches for the Gentiles,” 95–97.

37 Donaldson, Terence L., Paul and the Gentiles: Remapping the Apostle's Convictional World (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1997) 275Google Scholar

38 Ibid., 277: “Eleazar's role involves but goes beyond instruction to advocacy and strong encouragement. He felt impelled for whatever reason, to urge Izates to join the Jewish community according to his own boundary-markers.” For a lengthier discussion of this parallel, see ibid., 277–78.

39 Ibid., 273.

40 Ibid., 254.

41 Donaldson, “‘The Field,’”126.

42 Ibid., 132.

43 One school of thought proposes that this claim is to be understood in the sense that Paul established in major cities assemblies that served to evangelize the surrounding area. This category includes scholars such as: Dunn, James D. G., Romans (2 vols.; WBC 38; Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988Google Scholar) 2:869; Allen, Roland, Missionary Methods: St. Paul's or Ours? (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1962) 12Google Scholar; GüBornkamm, nther, Paul (New York: Harper & Row, 1971) 53–54Google Scholar. Another school of thought understands Paul to imply that his congregations represent the larger nations to which they belonged. This includes: Munck, Salvation, 277–78; Hultgren, Arland J., Paul's Gospel and Mission (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 127–37Google Scholar; and Jewett, Robert, “Ecumenical Theology for the Sake of Mission: Romans 1:1–17 + 15:14–16:24,” in SBL 1992 Seminar Papers ed. Lovering, Eugene H.; SBLSP 31; Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars, 1992) 598Google Scholar. See also Donaldson, “‘The Field,’” 114–16).

44 With this claim Donaldson is arguing against a popular viewpoint. For example, Wolf-Henning Ollrog proposed the theory of a zentrumsmission. For Ollrog, this term refers to a Pauline practice of employing temporary co-workers who were made available by their congregations to Paul for missionary purposes in their surrounding area. Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter. Untersuchungen zu Theorie und Praxis der paulinischen Mission (WMANT 50; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1979) 111–61. More recently, Roger W. Gehring has described the idea of a “center mission” slightly differently: he envisions a series of networked congregations, equal to one another in matters of authority, located in major city centers. They provide to Paul workers to assist with his missionary endeavors on a temporary basis. House Church and Mission: The Importance of Household Structures in Early Christianity (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2004) 181. Gehring shares his understanding of a center mission with several other scholars. They include Dibelius, Martin, Paulus (Sammlung Goschen 1160; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1970) 61–77Google Scholar; Goppelt, Leonhard, Die Apostolische und nachapostolische Zeit (2nd ed.; Die Kirche in ihrer Geschichte 1.A; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966) 61–63Google Scholar; Eichholtz, Georg, Die Theologie des Paulus im Umriss (7th ed.; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991) 25–26Google Scholar; Kasting, Heinrich, Die Anfänge der urchristlichen Mission: Eine historische Untersuchung (BEvT 55; Munich: Kaiser, 1969) 107Google Scholar; Conzelmann, Hans, Geschichte des Urchristentums (5th ed.; GNT 5; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983) 76–77Google Scholar. The fact that Paul never commands members of his congregations to evangelize contradicts the theory of center mission. In fact, Paul tells his congregations to live quietly and to be self-sufficient (1 Thess 4:11–12).

45 Donaldson, “‘The Field,’” 118–21.

46 Ibid., 124.

47 The Greek reads as follows: Λειτουργὸν Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ εἰϛ τὰ ἔθνη, ἱερουργοῦντα τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα γένηται ἡ προσϕορὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν εὐπρΌσδεκτοϛ, ἡγιασμένη ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ.

48 Lietaert Peerbolte, Paul, 246–47.

49 Ibid., 246–47.

50 Ibid., 248: “Paul obviously transforms the traditional expectation of the eschatological gathering of all of Israel to the idea of a gathering of Gentiles as an eschatological offering before the Lord: it is only in Paul's words that the Gentiles themselves form the offering. In Isa 66:20 they bring the dispersed Jews as an offering, and in Pss. Sol. 17,30–31 the Gentiles bring presents. In presenting the Gentiles as an offering Paul has created a new idea.”

51 Ibid., 254–55.

52 At various points in the book, he writes “‘his' [i.e., ‘Paul's'] communities,” which is consistent with his view that Paul preached and that communities formed from this preaching—but not necessarily due to Paul's own efforts to establish them. See ibid., 213.

53 Ibid., 258.

54 Schnabel, Mission, 2:945–82.

55 They are: 1 Cor 3:5–15; 9:19–23; 15:1–11; 2 Cor 2:14–16; 4:7–15; 5:20; Rom 1:14; 15:15–21; Col 1:24–29. Some of these passages do not deal directly with the purpose question, and the Colossians passage is not from an undisputed Pauline epistle.

56 Schnabel, Mission, 2:978.

57 Ibid., 2:1480.

58 Knox, “Romans 15:14–33,” 2.

59 Lietaert Peerbolte, Paul, 258: “For Paul, the communities he founded were not the ultimate goal of his ministry, but a means to a further spread of the gospel.”

60 Knox suggests as much when he argues that Paul has in mind acts of establishing and nurturing congregations, as well as preaching, in Rom 15:19. See “Romans 15:14–33,” 1. See also Schnabel, Mission, 2:978.

61 Other statements that do not meet the standard of specificity include Gal 2:2; Phil 2:16; and Phil 4:15.

62 Additional examples of negative actions are found in 1 Thess 2:5–8 and 2 Cor 4:1–2.

63 In 2 Cor 1:15–23, Paul speaks of one failed visit to Corinth. Within this text, he mentions an unfulfilled desire to visit Corinth (vv. 15–22) and later uses a statement of non-action (v. 23b). I have discussed these verses separately because they represent two different types of statements that will not factor into the discussion of action statements below.

64 While there is much discussion and dissension over the definition of “practices” among critics who fall under the rubric of the practice approach, it is generally conceived as “arrays of activities.” See Theodore R. Schatzki, “Introduction: Practice Theory,” in The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory (ed. Theodore R. Schatzki, Karin Knorr Cetina, and Eike Von Savigny; New York: Routledge, 2001) 2. For a more detailed explanation of “practice” see Joseph Rouse, “Two concepts of practices,” in Schatzki, Knorr Cetina, and Von Savigny, The Practice Turn, 190–98.

65 Schatzki, “Introduction,” 2.

66 It attempts to do the former by inventorying, categorizing, and analyzing the activities of Paul in order to illuminate his missionary objectives, and also the latter by favoring the domain of activities over the realm of discourse. Schatzki writes, “A…posthumanist agenda widely pursued in practice theory is the prioritization of practices over individuals (or individual subjects).…It…expresses itself decisively in a rejection of the modern conviction that mind is the central phenomenon in human life: the source of meaning, the receptacle of knowledge and truth, the wellspring of activity, and the co- or sole constitutor of reality.…Practices, in sum, displace mind as the central phenomenon in human life.” Schatzki, “Introduction,” 11.

67 Ibid., 11.

68 My claim that Paul's actions can illuminate his thought does not place this article in uncharted territory within NT scholarship. Martin Hengel argued in defense of the reverse: “Der ‘Sitz im Leben' der paulinischen Theologie ist die Mission des Apostels unter den ‘Völkern.’” “Die Ursprünge der christlichen Mission,” NTS 18 (1971) 37. In several studies, Ferdinand Hahn also argued that tackling Paul's theology is necessary in order to interpret aspects of his mission. See Mission in neutestamentlicher Sicht: Aufsätze, Vorträge und Predigten (Missionswissenschaftliche Forschungen 2/8; Erlangen: Erlanger Verlag für Mission und Ökumene: 1999) 65; and Mission in the New Testament (trans. Frank Clarke; SBT 47; London: SCM Press, 1965) 95–110.

69 Ibid., 12.

70 Many scholars hold that interactions between individuals and “arrangements in the world” mediate or possess knowledge and truth. Among these scholars are: Schatzki, “Introduction,” 12; Cetina, Karin D. Knorr, The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science (Pergamon international library of science, technology, engineering, and social studies; New York: Pergamon Press, 1981Google Scholar); Hacking, Ian, Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1983CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Latour, Bruno, Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1987Google Scholar); Lave, Jean, Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Andrew Pickering, ed., Science as Practice and Culture (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992); and Hans JöRheinberger, rg, Toward a History of Epistemic Things: Synthesizing Proteins in the Test Tube (Writing Science; Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1997Google Scholar).

71 A unified practice approach does not exist. Rather, there are four different strands of thought that comprise the practice tradition: 1) Philosophical—for example: Wittgenstein, Ludwig, Philosophical Investigations (trans. Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret Ansecombe; Oxford: Blackwell, 1958Google Scholar); Dreyfus, Hubert, Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1991Google Scholar); and Taylor, Charles, Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Collected Papers (vol. 2; Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar); 2) Social Theoretical—for example: Bourdieu, Pierre, Outline of a Theory of Practice (trans. Richard Nice; Cambridge Studies in Social Anthropology 16; Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1977CrossRefGoogle Scholar); and The Logic of Practice (trans. Richard Nice; Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1990); and Giddens, Anthony, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1984Google Scholar); 3) Cultural Theoretical—for example: Foucault, Michel, The Archaeology of Knowledge (trans. Alan Mark Sheridan Smith; Harper Colophon Books CN544; New York: Harper and Row, 1976Google Scholar); and Jean-FrançLyotard, ois, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi; Theory and History of Literature 10; Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 1984Google Scholar); and 4) Science and Technological Studies—for example: Rouse, Joseph, Engaging Science: How to Understand its Practices Philosophically (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996Google Scholar); and Pickering, Andrew, The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995CrossRefGoogle Scholar). However, there are two important differences between this study and other practice approaches. First, the present study entirely neglects the idea of collective practices, a topic that is the subject of much attention among practice theorists. Stephen Turner, in fact, has critiqued the notion for not being adequately explained by practice thinkers. See The Social Theory of Practices: Tradition, Tacit Knowledge, and Presuppositions (Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press, 1994); and “Throwing Out the Tacit Rule Book: Learning and Practices,” in Schatzki, Knorr Cetina, and Von Savigny, The Practice Turn, 120–30. Second, practice theorists often claim that an interpretation of practices can explain commonalities of activities performed by social groups, an idea that is not a focus of this paper. See Rouse, “Two Concepts of Practices,” 190.

72 See Schütz, John Howard, Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority (SNTSMS 26; Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1975) 9–14Google Scholar.

73 Schütz, Anatomy, 14.

74 Of course, these tasks furthered other objectives as well. For example, with regard to “sending co-workers to assemblies,” Wolf-Henning Ollrog has shown that the success of Paul's mission, despite its breadth, should be credited to Paul's use of co-workers. See Ollrog, Paulus, 111–61.

75 Meeks, First Urban Christians, 122.

76 Scholars agree that there existed multiple factions in Corinth, each headed by figures of authority, but disagree on whether there were two or four parties. If there were four, they were the Paul faction, the Cephas faction, the Apollos faction, and the Christ faction. For an early articulation of the four-party theory, see Ferdinand Baur, C., “Die Christuspartei in der korinthischen Gemeinde, der Gegensatz des petrinischen und paulinischen Christenthums in der ältesten Kirche, der Apostel Petrus in Rom,” Tübinger Zeitschrift für Theologie 4 (1831) 61–206Google Scholar. For the existence of just two factions (i.e., the Paul faction and the Apollos faction), see Meeks, First Urban Christians, 117.

77 Meeks, First Urban Christians, 122.

78 Ibid., 117. Meeks also categorizes Paul's acts of sending emissaries and letter writing as attempts to achieve “social control.” See ibid., 113–14.

79 This action statement refers to Paul's encounter with Peter in Antioch (Gal 2:11). Paul “opposed” (ἀντέστην) Peter over table-fellowship regulations.

80 See Barrett, Charles K., The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (BNTC 8; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2004) 281Google Scholar.

81 See Zander, Alvin, The Purposes of Groups and Organizations (The Jossey-Bass Management Series; San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985Google Scholar); and Robert Ross and Graham Staines, L., “The Politics of Analyzing Social Problems,” Social Problems 20 (1972) 18–40Google Scholar.

82 Bruce Tuckman, W., “Developmental Sequence in Small Groups,” Psychological Bulletin 63 (1965) 384–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Moreland, Richard L. and Levine, John M., “Group Dynamics Over Time: Development and Socialization in Small Groups,” in The Social Psychology of Time: New Perspectives ed. McGrath, Joseph E.; Sage Focus Editions 91; Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1988) 151–81Google Scholar. See also Malina, Bruce J., “Early Christian Groups: Using Small Group Formation Theory to Explain Christian Organizations,” in Modelling Early Christianity: Social-Scientific Studies of the New Testament in its Context ed. Philip F. Esler; New York: Routledge, 1995) 103Google Scholar.

83 Malina, “Early Christian Groups,” 103.

84 Ibid., 99: “All groups derive from some person who sees the need for change…the person aware of the need for change must share this awareness with others. These others then compare existing situations, options, obstacles and the like. Should these others agree with the shared awareness after comparing alternatives, they join the group and declare its purposes to others. Hence at the bottom of every group is the sequence: aware—share—compare—declare.” See also Ross and Staines, “Analyzing Social Problems,” 18–40.

85 Malina understands Paul's groups as social activity groups, which he distinguishes from the task-oriented group that Jesus established. Paul's groups are further distinguished from certain types of social activity groups, Paul's being an elective association/fictive kinship sub-group. See “Early Christian Groups,” 103–110.

86 For a detailed discussion of elective associations, see ibid., 108–110. Many scholars use the term “voluntary association” in a responsible manner to describe Greco-Roman guilds and clubs. For example, see the chapters in Voluntary Associations in the Graeco-Roman World (ed. John S. Kloppenborg and Stephen G. Wilson; New York: Routledge, 1996). Other scholars choose to situate Paul's communities sociologically by understanding them as “religious groups.” See Ekkehard Stegemann and Stegemann, Wolfgang, The Jesus Movement: A Social History of its First Century (trans. O. C. Dean, Jr.; Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1999) 284–85Google Scholar. Regardless of which term is employed to describe Paul's congregations, they remain subject to Tuckman's, Moreland's, and Levine's findings about small group formation.

87 Malina, “Early Christian Groups,” 104.

88 Ibid.

89 For example, in 2 Cor 10:17–18, Paul states, “‘Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.' For it is not those who commend themselves that are approved, but those whom the Lord commends.” Boasting in the Lord is one kind of boasting; the other is, as Cranfield calls it, “boasting in man,” which is prohibited by Paul. See Cranfield, C. E. B., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (2 vols.; 6th ed.; ICC: Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975–1979Google Scholar) 1:165.

90 Paul's role governing his associations has not been directly referenced in this article. I direct the reader to Meek's discussion of Paul's involvement in association governance. See First Urban Christians, 111–39.

91 The fourth category is the more controversial of the two since nurturing his associations is even more seldom included as part of Paul's mission than establishing associations. However, Schnabel has shown that Paul did not think his mission complete until his congregations were both established and consolidated—likewise, he did not think his mission complete until individuals had heard and also understood and obeyed the gospel. See Schnabel, Mission, 2:978. The inclusion of the tasks from the fourth category as part of Paul's mission is further strengthened once the dialectic between Paul's preaching task and his establishment and maintenance of communities is made clear. As will be seen, this dialectic presupposes properly functioning communities—not just established communities.

92 Bultmann, Theology, 1:306.

93 Ibid., 1:307.

94 Ibid.

95 Gehring, by contrast, argues that there were three levels to the Pauline community: 1) individual congregations; 2) the local church; and 3) the worldwide church. He posits that the local ἐκκλησία was the level of the institution at which Paul placed most significance. See Gehring, House Church, 225. For detailed study of the use of ἐκκλησία in the early Church, see Berger, Klaus, “Volksversammlung und Gemeinde Gottes. Zu den Anfängen der christlichen Verwendung von ‘Ekklesia,’” ZTK 73 (1976) 167–207Google Scholar; and Merklein, Helmut, “Die Ekklesia Gottes. Der Kirchenbegriff bei Paulus und in Jerusalem,” BZ 23 (1979) 48–70Google Scholar.

96 Bultmann, Theology, 1:308.

97 Bultmann summarizes Paul's idea on congregation leadership as follows: “His main thought is…that members are equal because they belong to Christ, and therefore their differences are unimportant [1 Cor 12:12–30]” (ibid).

98 Ibid., 1:311. Of course, ἐκκλησία sometimes means the universal Church, but in Gal 1:22 and 1 Thess 2:14 (two of the texts Bultmann quotes) Paul is referring to specific local congregations in Judea.

99 Schnabel, Mission, 1:420–21.

100 Goodman, Mission, 5.