refer to them with the name of the Roman province in which they were
found. Sometimes this is simply a matter of convenience, as when he wants
to speak collectively of the “churches of” Macedonia (2 Cor. 8:1), or Asia
(1 Cor. 16:19), or Galatia (Gal. 1:2), or when he wants to speak of all of the
Christians in an area (e.g., “all the believers in Macedonia and Achaia,”
1 Thess. 1:7; also 4:10). But something more than this is going on when,
speaking of the collection project, Paul uses provincial names almost as a
personification of the Christian groups present therein: “Macedonia and
Achaia have been pleased” to contribute to the project (Rom. 15:26); “Achaia
has been ready since last year” (2 Cor. 9:2). Something similar comes to
expression when Paul speaks of the household of Stephanus as “the first
fruits of Achaia” (1 Cor. 16:15), or of Epaenetus as the “first fruits of Asia”
(Rom. 16:5). These passages seem to suggest that Paul conceived of his
apostolic activity in provincial and representative terms: that is, his churches
and converts would represent, in some way, the larger provincial entities in
which they were located, with the provincial boundaries themselves pro-
viding the geographical framework within which his mission was to be
carried out.
If this is in any way an accurate description of Paul’s conception, it sug-
gests a way of understanding how he could say that he had “completed the
gospel” in a given area. Once the faith had taken sufficient root in one or
more cities, the province in which they were located and which they rep-
resented could be said to have been “completed” (though the question
would remain as to what constitutes sufficient “rootage”). Such a line of
interpretation has been widespread in scholarly discussion, though with two
distinct ways of understanding the mode of representation. First, there are
those who understand the relationship between the cities and the provinces
in terms of sober missionary strategy. Paul plants churches in particular cities
with the expectation that they will function as missionary centres from
which the faith will spread not only into the rest of those cities themselves
but also into the surrounding territory. In Dunn’s picturesque description:
“Paul’s vision then could be likened to lighting a series of candles at inter-
vals in a curve around the northeastern quadrant of the Mediterranean; hav-
ing lit them and ensured that the flame was steady, he left it to others to
widen the pool of light while he went on to light more at further discrete
centers of influence” (1988, 2:869; see also Allen 1962, 12; Bornkamm 1971,
53–54; Sanday and Headlam 1902, 409; M. Green 1970, 263).
Alternatively, it has been suggested (at least since the work of Munck)
that Paul thinks in terms of nations, not individuals, and, moreover, that
he does so within an eschatological framework. In Paul’s usage, it is argued,
“The Field God Has Assigned” 115