Paul frequently quotes from Isaiah does not cancel out the opposing fact that
he nowhere explicitly cites this text.
What, then, of the other, more commonly encountered, justification,
building on Paul’s stated preference for unevangelized territory? It, too, fails
to convince. It may well have been the case that provinces standing some-
what outside the Pauline arc (e.g., Cappadocia, Bithynia and Pontus) had
already been evangelized by others. Lack of information makes any judgment
on the matter difficult, though the connection of these regions with the fig-
ure of Peter (1 Pet. 1:1) may be of some significance. But surely within Paul’s
territory there was plenty of scope for additional work. In fact, we know
this to be true in the case of one city in particular, namely, Troas. Not long
before he wrote Romans 15, Paul had left Troas in search of Titus, despite the
fact that “a door was opened” for him there “to proclaim the gospel” (2 Cor.
2:12–13). In Troas, at least, there was room for more work to be done.
Looking at his eastern territory more generally, Paul’s return to Eph-
esus, after having worked further west in Macedonia and Achaia, might be
taken as evidence that Paul perceived Asia as a gap to be filled (Riesner 1994,
264–66). But even so, without any churches in Thrace, one cannot really
argue for a series of contiguous provinces from Galatia to Achaia. Asia is not
the only gap between Galatia and Macedonia. In any case, the absence of
any substantial information about evangelistic results in Thrace, Moesia,
and Illyricum itself suggests that these territories, apparently within the arc
of Paul’s provinces, offered plenty of room for additional work. What
Romans 15 seems to suggest, then, is: (1) that Paul wants to go on to Rome
and Spain, but (2) that for some reason, probably because of a sense of a
grand territorial task entrusted to him, he feels constrained to convince
himself and others that he is not heading off to Rome and Spain without
finishing his work in the east.
What, then, of Paul’s projected work in the west? Is it the case that
Paul’s intentions to evangelize in Spain form part of a discernible, coher-
ent plan to complete the “fullness of the nations” (Rom. 11:25)? As I will
argue in a subsequent section, I think it probably is the case that Spain’s
significance for Paul is its location at the “ends of the earth,” to use a rel-
evant Old Testament phrase. To this extent, then, I agree with Aus, Johannes
Munck, and others. But it cannot be enough simply to evangelize in Spain.
If this had been the goal, Paul could have headed there at the outset, and
saved himself a lot of grief and trouble! No, if Spain will bring the Gentile
mission to completion, it must be that Paul envisages the planting of
churches in every province up to and including Spain, or at least in a string
of contiguous provinces leading up to Spain.
nora
(Nora)
#1