Paul and His Associates: How New Testament Missionaries Work Together
Paul and His Associates: How New Testament Missionaries Work Together
Learning from Paul
Wolf-Henning Ollrog once aptly remarked that numerous studies have been done on Paul's opponents, but few on his friends and colleagues.1 A strange situation, since not only Acts, but also the Pauline epistles provide us with many details of the apostle's closest circle of friends and associates; the pastoral epistles concentrate on this subject!
In our present Bible study, we cannot collect systematically all the details on Paul's relationship to his friends and to the churches, as worthwhile as that effort would be. Nor can we set up an infallible catalog of rules for mission boards and missionaries to carry in their pockets. Instead, we can only investi-gate a few selected New Testament situations that portray the apostle's interac-tions with his associates in order to find out what they tell us about Paul and his relationship to his colleagues. Our question will be, "What wisdom can we gain for our own dealings with each other?"
Because human relationships are much too varied, changeable, and com-plicated to be simplified into one common denominator, Scripture does not try to regulate them with absolute laws, but recommends a wise2 response gained through experience, examples, and careful analysis of the situation. Ecclesiastes 10:8 ("He that diggeth a pit shall fall into it; and whoso breaketh an hedge, a serpent shall bite him.") is wise advise on relationships among people, but neither a law nor automatic. The Old Testament book of Proverbs, by the way, is the book to read on personal relationships, although it dispenses with laws and regulation. In fact, some proverbs even seem to contradict each other. A classi-cal example for this is Proverbs 26:4, "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit." Should we give the fool an answer or not? There are two sides to the question, and our response depends on the situation — the Bible gives us no absolute law in this case. The wise man must decide in the concrete situation with a concrete person what sort of response will bring the best result.
We find a further example of a wisdom rule which is to be applied only in a concrete situation in two texts which use the fact that people get tired of even honey (Chocolate would be more appropriate to our culture) to illustrate a point. Proverbs 25:16-17 tells us: "Hast thou found honey? Eat so much as is sufficient for thee, lest thou be filled therewith, and vomit it. Withdraw thy foot from thy neighbor's house; lest he be weary of thee, and so hate thee." Proverbs 25:27, however, reminds us, "It is not good to eat much honey: so for men to search their own glory is not glory." The reference to honey gives us a general principle that can help us to avoid annoyance on both sides. The Teacher of Wisdom sim-ply has no absolute rule for the amount of contact or praise we owe our friends. Such decisions require experience, as well as knowledge of the individual friend; to visit or to praise a good friend too often is not a sin, but it is unwise.
Since the Book of Proverbs is the epitome of wise teaching, I would like to apply an appropriate proverb to the various aspects of Paul's missionary activity.
Scene 1: Paul gives Titus precedence
(Paul, Titus, the church in Corinth)
Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counselors they are established. (Proverbs 15:223)
Paul's relationship to the church he had founded in Corinth was deteriorating4, as part of the church took a completely new line which was leading to catastrophic results. Some church members were participating in idol worship, visiting prostitutes, neglecting their marriage and ignoring starving members at Communion: and this all in God's name,5 yet the church leadership refused to discipline such behavior, a mockery of the very idea of the Christian life. In response, Paul wrote sharper words than in any other of his letters, except Galatians. When neither his very explicit letters (one which has been lost; 1 Cor. 5:9-11 and 1 Cor.) nor his visits brought any improvement, the apostle was in despair, full of fear and tears (2 Cor. 2:4) and saw no purpose in a further visit (2 Cor. 2:1). What did Paul do, as the apostle and the watchman of the gospel? Excommunicate the church? Assume that the Corinthians had sealed their own fate by rejecting him? Give up?
No, in the midst of his despair and pain, he showed his true greatness: completely incapable of continuing without assistance, instead of insisting on solving the problem himself, he called on Titus, probably from Crete.6 "For, when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled on every side; without were fightings, within were fears. Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus" (2 Cor. 7:5-6). This colleague, whose arrival so comforted Paul, was now sent to Corinth with a new letter, the so-called "letter of tears" (after 2 Cor. 2:4), written between 1 and 2 Corinthians. Paul was ecstatic when Titus was able to succeed where Paul had failed (2 Cor. 2:5-13; 7:5-16).
The apostle had apparently counted on the possibility that another person with a different personality, different gifts, and a different relationship to the church might be better able to achieve the necessary goals. Leaving the precedence and the success to his pupil, he expected that the disturbed relationship between himself and the Corinthians was hindering reconciliation, and that a neutral mediator could transform the situation. The possible loss of face was not so important to him, for he himself relates his own despair, tears, and incapability. Rectifying the situation was more important to him than salvaging his own reputation. He was concerned about the others, not about himself.
Paul describes how weak and depressed, unable to work in spite of open doors, he remained until Titus returned from Corinth, "Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ's gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia" (2 Cor. 2:12-13).
What can we learn from this episode?
Paul could work in a team. He didn't work well alone; the presence of his colleagues encouraged, comforted, and encouraged him. Luke tells us that he arrived in Corinth alone, but begged his associates to come as soon as possible (Acts 17:15). Not until they had arrived did he begin his true missionary activity. "And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ" (Acts 18:5).
Even after Paul's vision of the call to Macedonia (Acts 16:9 "And a vision appeared to Paul in the night; There stood a man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia, and help us."), he consulted with the others before making a decision. Not until the group confirmed the idea, did he leave (Acts 16:10). And that after a vision!
Paul did not see himself as the unapproachable, superior missionary who solved all problems objectively. Instead of creating his own monument to himself, he spoke openly of his own feelings, such as fear or grief, or of his own personal obstacles to his work, and of his lack of candor in preaching the gospel, which leads him to beg the churches to pray for him, "Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints; And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel, For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak" (Eph. 6:18; see also Col. 4:3; 2 Thess. 3:1; Acts 28:31).
Instead of boasting of his abilities, his endurance, or his successes, he confessed to the Corinthians, "If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities" (2 Cor. 11:30; see also 12:5-9). For Paul, problems were not only deep spiritual or theological issues, but equally important issues of personal relationships, which concerned the whole person, including his feelings. No wonder that he so often speaks of his tears (2 Cor. 2:4, Phil. 3:18; Acts 20:19-31; 2 Tim. 1:4-5).
By the way, it is also remarkable, that the most significant decisions were made directly on the missionary field, not by a far-distant missionary board. Missionaries were directing missionaries. Both principles were adhered to in the first centuries, but then forgotten. Not until the early faith missions such as the China-Inland Mission (OMF) and the WEC of the last century, were these principles rediscovered. Paul did interview new associates' home churches about the candidate's record (Acts 16:1-3), and expected them to support their missionaries through prayer, money, and ordination, but the essential decisions were made where the problems arose. The churches were then informed, but did not interfere.
Scene 2: Admonition for an apostle
(Paul and the Church in Rome)
He that hateth reproof is brutish (Proverbs 12:1) ... but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise. (Proverbs 12:15).
After completing the collection of offerings for the church in Jerusalem (Rom. 15:26-28), Paul intended to travel from Corinth7 by way of Jerusalem and Rome to Spain (Rom. 15:27-31), using Rome as his base, or home church, instead of Antioch. In order to account for his missionary activity and to share his aims with the Roman Christians, around 57 AD8 he wrote his great Epistle to the Romans, the Bible's most systematic exposition of the gospel and its most detailed justification of world missions.9
Even though he did not know the Roman church personally, he prayed for them continually (Rom. 1:9-10) and longed to meet them (Rom. 1:10-13; 15:22-23). His personal greetings to several associates and acquaintances living in Rome (Rom. 16:3-15) show the extent of his personal relationships. He also greets the house church of his associates, Aquila and Priscilla (Rom. 16:4, possibly other cell groups in 16:10-11).
Paul's descriptions of some of these friends are remarkable. Let's examine a few examples. Phoebe, the deaconess of the Cenchrean congregation,10 is to be supported in every way, "… for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also" (Rom. 16:1). Referring to Priscilla and Aquila, he writes, "Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus: Who have for my life laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles" (Rom. 16:3-4). He greets three men as "beloved" (Rom. 16:5,8,9), Maria, "who bestowed much labour on us" (Rom. 16:6), Andronicus and Junia,11 who had been imprisoned with Paul and "are of note among the apostles" (Rom. 16:7), Urbanus, "our fellow-worker" (Rom. 16:9) and "the beloved Persis, which laboured much in the Lord" (Rom. 16:12) and "Apelles, approved in Christ" (Rom. 16:10), etc.
What does Paul want to achieve through this letter? What is he intending to do in Rome? At the beginning of the letter, he writes, "For I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established; That is, that I may be comforted together with you by the mutual faith both of you and me" (Rom. 1:11-12). Paul wants to have fellowship with the believers in Rome, so that both he and they could share spiritual gifts. The word "comforted" in verse 12 could also mean "admonished," and is sometimes translated in this way. Some interpreters couldn't imagine that Paul not only had something to say to the Romans, but also expected some comfort and admonition from them! Paul was convinced, that the Christians in Rome were "Full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another" (Rom 15:14). Why should he exclude himself from their exhortations? In spite of his apostolic authority, Paul always shows himself to be dependent on the aid and prayers of other Christians. We can learn the following principles — principles already familiar to us from the situation in Corinth:
Admonition and comfort were not one-way streets in Paul's ministry. He created and looked forward to conditions in which he could receive these spiritual ministries from others.
He did not consider himself alone to be the personal counselor, leader, advisor, and exhorter of his associates. He always mentioned their labor very explicitly. Praising God and praising others were no contradiction for him; rather he considered them two sides of one coin. Gratitude for God's help and gratitude for others' assistance go together, and should both be expressed openly, not just in "the inner room."
Even when Paul had to admonish others — as a matter of fact, particularly then — he emphasized all they had done for him, for the church and for God. An explicit example is in Philippians 4:2-3, " I beseech Euodias, and beseech Syn-tyche, that they be of the same mind in the Lord. And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the gospel." He even "boasted" of the Corinthian church (1 Cor. 15:31; 2 Cor. 1:14; 7:4; 9:2-3), even to Titus, before sending him to remedy the chaos in the church (2 Cor., 7:13.16)! Paul admonished and criticized with uncompromising sharpness, but never without expressing commendation and gratitude, or without recognizing the positive elements.
Scene 3: Paul refuses to mount a spiritual pedestal
(Paul, Apollos and the Corinthian church)
Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom. (Proverbs 13:10)
Let's return to the tense relationship between Paul and the Corinthians. One problem was the spiritual cliques, who each appealed to different spiritual leaders. Paul describes the situation as following: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ" (1 Cor. 1:12).
C. S. Lewis writes appropriately: "The devil . . . always sends errors into the world in pairs-pairs of opposites. And he always encourages us to spend a lot of time thinking which is the worse."12 The Corinthians were divided on almost everything, but Paul almost never sided with any one position,13 but generally criticized both opinions, for neither agreed with God's concepts. The issue of spiritual leaders was no exception. Some honored Paul so much that he asked, "Was Paul crucified for you?" (1 Cor. 1:13). To those who denied him any authority whatever, he insisted on his apostolic calling. The fact that the Lord had entrusted him, a mere servant of God, with great truths, was endangered by those who made him the center of attention, as well as by those who — perhaps in reaction to the first — scorned both the apostle and the revelation he preached. Paul had to teach the Corinthians, that not he, but his divine commission and the revelation in divine Scripture, had priority. "And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another" (1 Cor. 4:6). To reject an unbiblical viewpoint does not guarantee that one is without error. And one may still be just as arrogant as his opponents. In Paul's opinion, the Corinthian problem was that everyone based their opinions on special revelations and doctrines which went beyond scriptural revelation, and then cited some apostle, teacher, or even Christ, to prove their position, playing God's ministers off against each other, although all taught the same truths, even though with differing gifts and assignments.
The most painful part of these party politics was that they pitted Apollos, an associate introduced by Paul to the Corinthian church, against him. As we have seen, Paul pinpointed the problem not as differences in personalities or gifts, but in exaggerations and misinterpretation of the Scripture. Paul refused to participate in this sort of rivalry: he declined any discussion of importance, sig-nificance, or achievement. "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building. According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth there-upon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:5-11; see chapters 3 and 4).
In a situation in which church members attempted to alienate Paul and Apollos, construing differing theologies on the basis of their differing personalities and gifts (a tactic copied much too often), Paul sought reconciliation, not by pointing to himself or insisting on unity, but by pointing to the one foundation, Jesus Christ, as the basis on which varieties of styles, personalities, gifts, and commissions could develop.
And Apollos? Although we know nothing of his reaction, we can imagine that he was relieved and encouraged by Paul's refusal to sanction the divisions and the apostle's endeavor to find common ground. Rather than destroying his colleague, Paul strengthened his friend's position in the complicated situation in Corinth.
Scene 4: Training by Example
Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser: teach a just man, and he will increase in learning. (Proverbs 9:9)
Let's return to the tense and complicated situation in Corinth again. In 1 Corinthians 4:4-16, Paul compares his relationship to the church with the relationship of a father to his children. He calls them "his beloved children," and himself their father. Because he is their father, he must reprimand them so sharply. "I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you" (v. 14). Note that Paul reserves the term "Father" for himself; other believers who provide for the Corinthian church are only "instructors." In fact, Paul sees a great difference between himself and the other "instructors." The tutor or instructor (Gr. paidagogos; the source of our word "pedagogy") was only a slave responsible for academic training. Paul is saying, "Even if you had ten thousand excellent tutors teaching you all sorts of good and right things, that would not make me any less your father!" Since a father teaches his child not only ideas but also life, Paul exhorts the Corinthians to imitate him (v. 16). Parents not only examine their childrens' ideas but also their actions; they are not only available in routine affairs, but also in danger and crises. Lawrence Richards, defining the difference between modern education methods and Biblical education, suggested that modern methods aim at teaching a student what his teacher knows; Christian education aims at teaching the pupil to live as his teacher lives.14
Paul's associates were mostly his own converts or pupils trained from the very beginning (ex. Timothy, Acts 16:1-3; Aquila and Priscilla, Acts 18: 1, 18, 26, Rom. 16:3, 1 Cor. 16:19, 2 Tim 4:19). Others were "apostles of the churches" (2 Cor. 8:23; Phil 2:25), missionaries with responsibility for several churches, sent to assist Paul by the congregations. Besides these associates, Paul also concentrated on discipling the elders of the new churches, generally the first converts in the area. He ordained them surprisingly early (Acts 14:6-7, 22-23) and left soon after they had taken over the responsibility. His longest stay in one area was three and a half years (with frequent interruptions) in Ephesus (Acts 18:23-19:40).
Paul was merely imitating Jesus' training methods. Mark tells us, "And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils" (3:14-15). Three aspects in Jesus' selection are significant.
Jesus concentrated on a small group of disciples, "that they should be with him." Just as a father can only care for a small number of children properly, so Jesus chose to share His life and teaching with a small group of disciples. No one can really live so intensively with more than a few people. We can see Jesus' deliberate limitation in the concentric circles of His friends; the smaller groups enjoyed closer fellowship with Him. He even had one favorite disciple, John (John 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20; see also 19:27).
Paul also had concentric circles of friends, with Timothy at the center. "For I have no man likeminded, who will naturally care for your state. For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's. But ye know the proof of him, that, as a son with the father, he hath served with me in the gospel" (Philippians 2:20). As the apostle's closest associate, Timothy collaborated on five of the epistles (Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, and Philemon15), and was the recipient of two more. Paul addressed him as "Timothy, my own son in the faith" (1 Tim. 1:2; 1:18) and "my dearly beloved son" (2 Tim. 1:2).
Jesus chose the disciples "that he might send them forth to preach." The goal of such intensive fellowship with the Lord and the dependence on Him was future ministry. Jesus never intended that the Twelve remain in "tied to His apron strings," they were to go into the world and continue His work after He had returned to Heaven. His goal was the Great Commission, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world" (Mt. 28:19-20).16 The long training program in missions, in which the disciples lived with the prototype of the missionary — Jesus Himself — was not erratic, but carefully planned, according to the following strategy: Jesus first preached by Himself, then He preached while His disciples observed. Finally He let the disciples preach while He observed, and then He sent them out on their own (but remained by them in spirit as the risen Lord (see Mt. 28:20).
Paul trained his associates in the same way. As father and example, he worked towards the future independent ministry of his churches and his colleagues.
Jesus' comprehensive training program included life and doctrine, theory and practice, individual and group counseling, inner and outer growth, activity and rest, profession and private life. Doctrine corresponded to counseling and practice.
Paul imitated Jesus in this aspect as well, as we see in 1 Thessalonians, "Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy" (not just Paul) not only preached the gospel "in word only," "but were also willing to share their lives with the believers" (1 Thes. 1:1, 5; 2:8). Of course they preached with words and doctrine; no one could otherwise have understood what their example meant! The epistles to the Thessalonians demonstrate that Paul had taught both Silas and Timothy by his example, and that the Thessalonians themselves became examples for others.
Paul includes Silas and Timothy in 1 Thessalonians 6: "and ye became followers of us, and of the Lord." Many object to this statement. How can Paul compare himself and his associates with Jesus? The Bible, however, often uses human role models to point to God's example. Isn't that realistic? A child derives his image of God from the example of his parents, and spiritual children derive their image of God from the example of their spiritual parents. Every father is a role model, whether he wants to be or not; he only has the choice between being a good example or a bad one. All who carry responsibility in the church, every politician, is a role model, whether good or bad.
But did only Jesus and Paul restrict their training programs to such small groups? 2 Timothy 2:2 contradicts this idea: "Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." Paul gives a rule for discipling. The Lord's church grows by the personal supervision of small groups by spiritually mature believers, not by the efforts of one leader to take care of dozens, hundreds, or nowadays, of thousands. True spiritual growth and fruitful training occurs when spiritually mature Christians concentrate on small groups of spiritual children, sharing both life and doctrine until the young believers have become mature enough to become independent. This is the best way to fulfill the Great Commandment to make disciples of all nations ... teaching them to observe all things that Christ had commanded (Mt. 28:18-20).
What principles can we learn from Paul?
1. Paul loved his associates and was available to them, comprehensively. His love did not lead him to treat them like eternal children, but to direct them to spiritual maturity and independence.
2. Paul invested more in the relationships of the missionaries to each other and in their spiritual maturity than in technical details or strategic issues (although he was quite aware of this sort of problem, as well).
3. Paul prayed constantly and intensively for his colleagues and his churches, and expected them to do the same.
4. Paul encouraged the development of his associates' gifts. He knew that God had created different sorts of personalities and expected Him to use them accordingly.
1. Wolf-Hennig Ollrog. Paulus und seine Mitarbeiter: Untersuchungen zu Theorie und Praxis der paulinischen Mission, Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten Testament 50 (Neukirchen, Germany: Neukirchener Verlag, 1979), p. 3. Beginning with the historical data in the New Testament on Paul's associates, and a word study on the term synergos, Ollrog divides Paul's colleagues into three groups: the apostle's closest colleagues, who accompany him at all times, the independent associates, who aid him in particular "chance" situations, and representatives of the churches, sent by their churches in order to participate in the missionary effort. This last group made a close relationship between church, missionaries, and mission field. Ollrogs' book is unfortunately incomplete, for he assumes that 2 Thess., Eph. Col., and the pastoral epistles are non-Pauline (p. 1) and thus ignores a large amount of material. Many questions which he leaves unresolved could be answered, if such rigorous criticism would give up restricting the amount of authentic material. Acts is also treated in this fashion: the book is considered Lucan, but is not taken seriously — the author is convinced that Luke has falsified his data.
2. Thomas Schirrmacher. Ethik (Neuhausen, Germany: Hänssler Verlag, 1994), Vol. 1, pp. 492-503. "Besides the absolutely valid, directly applicable laws, we find "wisdom," whose decisions depend on the situation and the knowledge of the persons involved. Wisdom can only be expressed in proverbs, parables, examples, and illustrations, and includes experiences, which are only true under certain conditions. (see Prov. 15:2; 22:6)"( pp 492-493).
3. See also Proverbs 11:4; 20:18; 24:6.
4. Heinz Warnecke, Thomas Schirrmacher. "Plädoyer für die historische Glaubwürdigkeit der Apstelgeschichte und der Pastoralbriefe," in War Paulus wirklich auf Malta? (Neuhausen, Germany: Hänssler Verlag, 1992), pp. 181-235.
5. Thomas Schirrmacher. Paulus im Kampf gegen den Schleier: Eine alternative Sichte von 1. Kor 11:2-16. Biblia et symbiotica 4 (Bonn, Germany: Verlag für Kultur und Wissenschaft, 1993), pp. 111-152.
6. Heinz Warnecke, Thomas Schirrmacher. War Paulus wirklich auf Malta? op. cit.
7. Paul is living in the home of Gaius (Rom. 16:23), a Corinthian (1 Cor. 1:14), and recommends Phoebe of Cenchrea, Corinth's port (Rom 16:1). She may have delivered the letter to Rome, since she is the first person mentioned in Paul's list of greetings in Romans 16, and since Paul recommends that the church receive her warmly. It thus seems reasonable to assume that Paul dictated the epistle to Tertius, his secretary (Rom. 16:22) in Corinth or Cenchrea, and then gave to Phoebe to deliver. Adolf Schlatter points out the numerous paralells between Romans and the Epistles to the Corinthians, and deduces that the Epistle to the Romans must have been written against the background of the conflict with the Corinthian church. See: Adolf Schlatter. Gottes Gerechtigkeit: Ein Kommentar zum Römerbrief (Stuttgart: Germany: Calwer Verlag, 19755), pp. 9-16.
8. Paul does not decide to visit Macedonia and Achaia, or to go from Jerusalem to Rome until Acts 19:21. In Acts 20:2, he travels through Macedonia and Achaia, probably collecting offerings for the believers in Jerusalem, which agrees with Romans 15:26. He probably wrote the letter prior to his journey to Jerusalem in the three months in Greece which he mentions in Acts 20:3. In this case, the letter would have been composed around 57 AD.
9. See Thomas Schirrmacher. "Romans as a Charter of World Missions: A Lesson in the Relation of Systematic Theology and Missiology" An International Journal of Frontier Missions 10 (1993) 4 (Oct): 159-162; or in Reflection: An International Reformed Review of Missiol-ogy 4 (1993/94) 1/2 (Sept.-Nov): 34-39: in Chalcedon Report No. 342 (Jan 1994): 43-47. For a more detailed discussion, see: Thomas Schirrmacher. Der Römerbrief, " 2 Vols. (Nehuhausen, Germany: Hänssler Verlag, 1994), a commentary on Romans from the viewpoint of missiology and dogmatics.
10. Thomas Schirrmacher. Der Römerbrief, op. cit., pp. 311-312.
11. Ibid., p 312, on the question of whether Junia was a man or a woman.
12. C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1952), p. 160.
13. Thomas Schirrmacher. . Paulus im Kampf gegen den Schleier. op. cit., pp. 114-122. See also Karl Wieseler. Zur Gesichte der Neutestamentlichen Schriften und des Christentum (Leipzig, Germany: J. C.Hinrich'sche Buchhandlung, 1880) pp. 1-53 on the Corinthian parites.
14. Lawrence O. Richards, A Theology of Christian Education (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975), p. 30. See also: Lawrence Richards, A Theology of Church Leadership (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979); Lawrence Richards, A Theology of Personal Ministry (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981).
15. See the first verse of the books.
16. Robert E. Coleman. Des Meisters Plan der Evangelisation (Neuhasuen, Germany: Hänssler, 1983).