Corpus-Paul

["David Hindley" <dhindley AT compuserve.com>]

Richard,

It may be a good idea to look in to the matter of just who, or what areas, 
were subject to sabbatical year planting prohibitions,
and which were not. If I remember correctly, provisions regarding tithes and 
such applied only to the land of Israel, which in the
1st century was restricted to Judea, and even there was probably further 
restricted to areas that were not in the possession of
Greek colonies (there were a few) or gentile landowners. 

I believe that Galilee was not even subject to the sabbatical year 
prohibition. You are probably aware that a comparison between the
two accounts of Gaius' attempt to erect his statue in the temple (Josephus 
and Philo), some statements refer to a fear that the
Sabbatical year would allow many to gather in mass in violent opposition, and 
others that suggest that the Syrian governor Petronius
was anxious for planting to resume so tribute could be paid. The problem is 
that Judaea would have been exempt from tribute in a
sabbatical year. 

If a sabbatical year was mandatory in both Judea and Galilee, who would 
Petronius have expected to be returning to the planting of
crops in order to pay tribute if the decree was rescinded, as he promised 
Gaius? No one, because they would all have been prohibited
from planting anyways. If the sabbatical year rule was in effect in Judea but 
not in Galilee, then we could expect to find *both*
masses of idle workers to oppose the attempt in Judea *and* a temporary lack 
of planting in Galilee due to the masses of people who
left their fields to protest before Petronius, but who would be able to 
return to the task if the danger to the temple was obviated.

So, in short:

In Judea:               Subject to sabbatical year law. Land is fallow on 
account of a sabbatical year. Danger to Rome is not so
much loss of tribute, since tribute was temporarily suspended in sabbatical 
years anyways, but that of violent opposition by idle
agricultural masses.

In Galilee:             Not subject to Sabbatical year law. Land is ready to 
be planted, but planting is interrupted by the masses
of people who left their fields to protest before the governor of Syria. The 
danger to Rome is interruption of tribute. If the
situation could be diffused, the masses of protesters could return to work 
and the tetrarchy would be in a better position to pay
its full tribute. 

Respectfully,

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio USA

PS: Are you aware that R Eisenman treats the possibility that Paul was as a 
possible grain buyer for Queen Helena of Adiabene? 

-----Original Message-----
From: corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org 
[mailto:corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fellows
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:33 PM
To: Corpus-Paul
Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Sabbatical years and Paul's collections

 
Ron wrote:
>it seems to me inconceivable that
> Gentiles would have contributed generously (2 Cor 8:2) to such
self-imposed
> penury.

Josephus mentions the hardship resulting from Sabbatical years, and I do not 
detect that he was at all embarrassed by it. Also, it
seems that Sabbatical year observance was compulsory, so the Aegean churches 
surely would not blame the Judean church for the
resulting poverty. I do not think that the Gentile churches would have 
refrained from relieving poverty that was, in part, caused by
Sabbatical year observance.

However, I can imagine that later generations of Gentile Christians would 
have been less sympathetic to poverty caused by Sabbatical
years. If this were the case for the audience of Acts, it could explain why 
Luke mentions the famine collection but does not mention
the collection from Galatia (1 Cor 16:1-3) or the Aegean collection.

We do not know how poor the Judean church was in non-sabbatical years.
People have proposed a lot of possible causes of its poverty. However, with a 
little imagination, I am sure that we could find an
equal number of mitigating factors. All we know is that there was poverty in 
the church of Judea when Paul hoped to deliver the
collection. Now, my point is this:
whatever the level of poverty or otherwise in normal years, the poverty would 
have been more extreme in Sabbatical years.
Collections and requests for aid are therefore more likely at these times. 
Not only does this stand to reason, it is also supported
by the fact that the Aegean collection can be shown to have taken place (as 
far as we can tell) at the time of the Sabbatical year.

2 Cor 8:14 mentions the 'present time'. Paul is asking for a one time gift to 
meet a present need. Indeed, the second part of the
verse seems to suggest the possibility that Judea may give to Achaia in the 
future (though we cannot be sure about this). The verse
suggests that the acute poverty in Judea is expected to be temporary and this 
is consistent with the Sabbath year.

I remember only one argument in the literature against the suggestion that 
Paul designed his Aegean collection to coincide with the
Sabbatical year. It is supposed that 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians are 
separated by 18 months and that therefore Paul left Achaia
for Jerusalem at least a year later than he originally intended. This delay 
would not be sensible if Paul had a Sabbatical year
deadline to meet. However, the argument should be reversed:
the Sabbatical year deadline (along with many other pieces of evidence) shows 
that there was no such gap between 1 Corinthians and 2
Corinthians.

The Sabbatical year chronology is also important in confirming the 
conventional date for the Gal 2 visit (49 or so). Gal 2:10 in
combination with the "14 years" of Gal 2:1 increase the probability that the 
Gal 2 visit was during a Sabbatical year. This argues
against Knox and his school, who place it later. It also argues against 
equating Gal 2 with the famine visit, which would have been
before the Sabbath year. Acts 15 fits nicely.

During a Sabbath year people would be free from agricultural work and would 
therefore have the time for other activities, such as
travel. Even those in other professions would be more inclined to travel in 
Sabbath years because their wages would be lower because
of the surplus of labour. Whereas we tend to make our (shorter) trips at 
weekends, I imagine that Judeans tended to make their
longer journeys during the Sabbath year. Now, a lot of Judeans travelled in 
Acts 15 and Gal 2 (those of Acts 15:1 as well as
Barsabbas and Silas, and Peter and those from James). This flurry of activity 
further supports the view that Gal 2 = Acts 15 =
Sabbath year.

Richard.