3rd Missionary Trip - Lorin

cus and Junia (16:7), as well as Herodion (16:11). The reason for this is that in 9:3 the phrase οἱ συγγενεῖς μου
κατὰ σάρκα seems to mean ‘my fellow countrymen,’ i.e., fellow Jews, rather than blood relatives. But one needs
to see this from a first century Jewish perspective, rather than a modern western view. συγγενής very probably
designated the individuals as fellow Benjaminites. Coming from the same tribe of Israel would have been virtually
equivalent to considering these individual as blood relatives. This perspective clearly explains the use of the term
in Luke 1:58; 2:44; 14:12; 21:16. Luke’s use of it in Acts 10:24 regarding the relatives of the Gentile Cornelius
pushes the kinship idea tighter.
Tertius inserts his own greeting to the Roman church in 16:22 as the actual writer of the letter: ἀσπάζομαι
ὑμᾶς ἐγὼ Τέρτιος ὁ γράψας τὴν ἐπιστολὴν ἐν κυρίῳ, I Tertius, the writer of this letter greet you in the Lord. We know
virtually nothing about this individual apart from his writing the Roman letter for Paul. His name, Τέρτιος, is actually
Latin in origin and means “third.” It was a common slave name in the first century, and may imply the same
for Tertius. One certain aspect from this statement is that he was a Christian, as the phrase ἐν κυρίῳ, in the Lord,
makes clear.
Page 440
177 Further identification of him moves completely into the realm of speculation with no real foundation.
178 He had some kind of connection to Corinth already, and his services were made available to the apostle
in the writing of the letter to the Romans.
What is somewhat unusual is the first person injection of his own greetings by the writing secretary. What
is much more common when the writing secretary is identified comes in 1 Peter 5:12 where Peter in giving the
sender verification in his own hand writing, graciously identifies Silvanus as being the writing secretary. Perhaps
Titius’ own injection of his greeting signals some prior connection with the church in Rome, but we cannot be
certain of that.
The sixth person to send greetings to Rome is Gaius, Γάϊος (v. 23). This name surfaces five times in the
New Testament, and the question then comes about how many individuals had this name in early Christianity. In
Ephesus a Gaius, along with Aristarchus, were dragged into the theater by the silversmiths (Acts 19:29). Luke
identifies this Gaius as being from Macedonia and a traveling companion of Paul. In the list of traveling companions
who go with Paul from Corinth on the trip to Jerusalem, a Gaius is mentioned but identified as coming from
Derbe (in Galatia) in Acts 20:4. Thus we have the second Gaius who traveled with Paul on the third missionary
journey, at least some of the way. Now in Romans (16:23a) we have a Gaius who is with Paul in Corinth, but he
lives in Corinth and Paul is staying with him during this three month stay in the city, as well as the entire church
in Corinth uses his home for a central meeting place. Thus Gaius number three! 179 Clearly he is the same fellow
that Paul mentions by name in 1 Cor. 1:14 as being one of the two people that Paul remembered baptizing during
his stay in Corinth on the second missionary journey. Finally, there is the Gaius in 3 John 1, who appears to be
177Some difference of opinion exists over the proper understanding of the syntax of the Greek sentence. The question centers on
what the prepositional phrase ἐν κυρίῳ, in the Lord, (here in adverbial function clearly) modifies Strong grammatical arguments can be
marshalled in support of both options, either the participle, γράψας, having written, or the verb, ἀσπάζομαι, I send greetings. Thus is the
religious concept of being “in the Lord,” (= being a believer) qualifying the writing of the letter or the sending of greeting? Most Bible
translators will assume the latter, but the former is legitimately possible as well. But when one pauses to reflect on how much difference
this actually makes to the meaning of the sentence, the honest answer is “virtually none.”
178One of these rather ‘imaginary” speculations is that of Robert Jewett. He postulates that Phoebe is a wealthy business woman
who has agreed to underwrite Paul’s projected trip to Rome and then on to Spain. Tertius is her slave that she lends to Paul so that a
record of his ministry can be created for reporting back to her periodically on how Paul is spending her money.
While it is clear from 16:23 that Paul is currently lodging with Gaius in Corinth rather than with Phoebe in Cenchraea, I suggest
that part of her patronage consisted in placing her highly skilled scribe, Tertius, at Paul’s disposal for the long period required for
planning, refining, and drafting this letter. As a person of patronage status whose likely business in Cenchraea was in shipping, she
had in all likelihood traveled with her staff back and forth to Rome, where Tertius could have easily become acquainted with fellow
believers. As Richards suggests, he may actually have originated in Rome, where secretaries using shorthand were frequently
trained and available. 38 The identification of this particular amanuensis was therefore an integral part of the strategy of this letter,
because Tertius was to accompany his owner Phoebe to Rome, where a skilled reading was required for each of the house and
tenement churches. As the amanuensis of this letter, he was in the best position to present this complicated text orally, taking
advantage of each stylistic nuance. 39
[Robert Jewett and Roy David Kotansky, Romans: A Commentary, ed. Eldon Jay Epp, Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical
Commentary on the Bible (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2006), 979.]
While an interesting scenario, Jewett stretches our imagination beyond the breaking point with such a proposal. He has to really
stretch some basic information about writing secretaries available in Greco-Roman sources in order to prop up his picture.
179Curiously one or two modern commentators propose that Gaius’ full name was Gaius Titius Justus, thus combining the Gaius
in Corinth who opened his home with Titius Justus who did the same thing into the same person. For an analysis of the triple name and
the identification with the Gaius in Rom 16:23, see Edgar J. Goodspeed, “Gaius Titius Justus,” JBL 69 (1950) 382 and John Gillman,
“Gaius,” ABD 2 (1992) 869. At best this is a big stretch, and is very unlikely.