In Paul and his Letters, John Polhill speculates that Paul may have been from a wealthy family based on his citizenship (B&H, 1999, p. 9). To obtain citizenship, someone might need to spend eighteen months’ wages or more on bribes to secure the honor (Polhill cites Dio Chrysostom, Orations, 34.1–23).
The fact that Paul was a tentmaker from Tarsus may imply that he worked with cypress, a costly material used for both tents and saddles (Hengel, The Pre-Christian Paul, Trinity Press, 1991, p. 99). Since Jews were known to have worked in Tarsus’s active textile industry, it is possible that Paul’s family was connected to this trade. On the other hand, Paul may have learned his trade through his rabbinical training. A trade was required to support one’s study of the Torah. Tent-making may have been a choice he made while studying in Jerusalem rather than the family business. Tent-making was potentially lucrative. Tarsus was known for a particular felt-like material made from goats’ wool native to the region. This cloth and other linens were expensive and required special handling. It is possible that Paul and his family worked with this sort of cloth, doing jobs for the wealthy of Tarsus.
It may be that Paul voluntarily took a vow of poverty after his conversion, renouncing his family’s wealth. This is based on the early disciples in Acts 2-3 who sold everything and “lived in common.” While there is nothing that rules out Paul living in poverty, it seems that he may have relied on his wealth to finance his ministry. He is not known for accepting gifts from churches, yet he is able to travel extensively, working as a tentmaker in the cities he hopes to reach for the gospel.
On the other hand, Martin Hengel speculates that Paul’s education may be a hint at his social status. If he came to Jerusalem at a young age, he was likely from a “well-to-do” family that could afford to send a son to study there.
Paul’s extensive travels were expensive. He had to finance his group’s travel. He likely rented a place to stay in Corinth, and in Ephesus, he rented a room to teach in for over two years. On at least two occasions, Paul had to support himself while under house arrest (Caesarea and Rome). In Rome, he lived in a rented house for two years and was unable to work to support himself. Is it possible that Paul was able to use his family’s wealth to pay for travel and housing?
Another important evidence is that Paul sponsored a vow in Acts 21. The Nazarite vow was a Jewish tradition intended as a deeply spiritual exercise. To sponsor such a vow would be an indication of Jewish loyalty and fidelity to the Law. For example, Agrippa I sponsored vows for several young men to demonstrate his personal loyalty to the law (Josephus, Antiq. 19.294). Since the expenses for the vow itself could be high, wealthy men could show their support by paying the expenses for one or more men completing their vow. While it is possible that Paul took this money from the collection he delivered to Jerusalem, the text does not state this. In any case, taking money intended for the poor in Jerusalem to sponsor the vow does not seem appropriate; the money ought to come from Paul’s own pocket.
To what extent does Paul’s wealth affect the way he did ministry? Modern evangelism is often targeted at the “down and out,” people who are on the fringes of society. This is very much like Jesus, and perhaps Peter in Acts 9. Did Paul target wealthy, higher-class people (ie, Roman citizens) because he was a wealthy Roman citizen?
If Paul was in fact very wealthy, which seems quite likely to me, it would reinforce the magnitude of his ministry. While he already began living as a traveler, to give up the luxury of a Pharisaical background and the comfortable, unopposed lifestyle is amazing. Not only was his mindset refurbished, but his entire life and culture would be literally “as loss” for Christ. Concerning whether or not Paul was wealthy, I would lean towards the former. He seems to be know quite a bit about Philosophy and Scripture, which assumes he had the ability to be educated. I think the idea of Paul as wealthy is appealing to us, for the exact reason I just stated, it makes for a good metaphor and life representation; however, the search for logical understanding and a virtuous life would have been ideal for any in the first century. This is obviously not the point of Paul’s conversion, but it would have not been unheard of for people to question their heritage and begin to pursue something bigger than themselves, even if that meant giving up certain things.
“to give up the luxury of a Pharisaical background and the comfortable”
Good point, Joe, I had not thought of this in terms of Paul giving up his wealth and position. I was thinking that he might have used whatever means he had to finance his missionary travels, living expenses and even production of the letters. I do not see alot of evidence of Paul asking for or receiving help from his churches – how did he finance a trip from Ephesus to Jerusalem for a large number of people if he did not have some substantial wealth at his disposal?
From the evidence presented, it does appear that Paul had some considerable wealth. Just the fact alone that Paul came to study in Jerusalem from Tarsus is an indicator of a large monetary investment. In our modern society, it can be hard to imagine the sheer expense that would have been involved in travel at that time. I cannot imagine many people had the funds to travel so far to not only study, but study under one of the most prominent rabbis of the day, Gamaliel (Polhill 2091). It appears that Paul’s family would have had some connection to obtain such an education. And usually, those connections involved some type of monetary funds. Paul’s subsequent journeys (Arabia and his missionary journeys) also would have required a considerate amount of funds which it appears he had available to him. Because Paul appears to have been in a different social status than the other apostles, it does make sense that he would minister to those people. He would have possibly had connections with Roman citizens and those of the higher class, which would naturally lend opportunities for him to share the gospel. I wonder if sometimes today we forget that the message of salvation needs to be shared with everyone, regardless of whether they appear to need it or not. As you said, modern evangelism often targets those who are “down and out” (Long), but “down and out” does not simply mean in a physical, monetary sense. Anyone who does not have the knowledge of God’s salvation is “down and out”. Paul’s connections and status may have opened doors that may not have been opened to others. Instead of thinking those of a higher class would not have a need for Jesus, Paul takes advantage and shares the gospel with them. I think the reminder for us is to recognize and be willing to minister to anyone who we may be offered the chance to.
Reference
Polhill, John B. (Ed). The Acts of the Apostles. In ESV Study Bible. Wheaton: Crossway Bibles, 2008.
Paul was born during the Hellenistic period in the home of a Pharisee. In Acts, we see that Paul introduces himself as a Jew and a native of Tarsus. The ESVSB notes that “Tarsus was known as a home to philosophers, especially those of the Stoics school. Archaeologists have uncovered a basalt street with limestone gutters from the New Testament period, and one can also see foundations of a huge second century- A.D. temple” (Acts 9:30 notes). Tarsus was known as a nicer and well-established city. The city was the center of Greek philosophical and literary education. So the chances of Paul coming from a wealthy family are pretty high.
Paul tried his hardest to not let his wealth affect his ministry, he did not want to be a burden to his audience. 1 Thessalonians 2:9 tells us that Paul and his companions worked day and night to not burden any of the people they stayed with. Paul always had a plan in mind to work with his hands rather than rely on others. He did of course also receive aid and assistance from communities when the Lord provided. Considering Paul wasn’t letting work for his money, I’d say his wealth wasn’t affecting his ministry.
Paul already knew the people of Tarsus and he knew their ways of life since he grew up with them. So I don’t think he necessarily targeted then rather he went back to what was comfortable and what he knew when assistance was needed.
None of you state the fact that Paul rented an “Inn” for two full years. Acts 28:30 “And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,” It settles the debate. Paul was an extraordinarily rich man, and his work as a tent maker was merely to be an example for his brothers that could easily fall into lazy habits and lifestyle. It is also thinkable that he sometimes had to work, simply because there was no straightforward way to get funds to him from his family.
Paul was from a wealthy family, and he had many great things in his life. He had as much as others had, and he did not worry about his family or life. He could afford to live the same life as others, and he had a wonderful childhood in comparison. Paul had a great education in his life because his family had enough treasure to send Paul to study in Jerusalem. At that time, not everyone could go to school in Jerusalem because it was the biggest city and everything was expensive, and most of them were rich people. Paul could go there, and it showed that his family was wealthy. Paul was on the fast-track to leadership in the Sanhedrin, and he was against the believers and wanted to kill believers. Paul knew the law very well, and he was young and trained very well. He was great at talking with the leaders of the community, and he was respected by the people. If his family was not wealthy, then Paul could not go to a great school and would not have the opportunity to study in the great city of Jerusalem.
The apostle Paul journeyed to many places to evangelize and sponsored a Nazarite vow. In class we also talked about how he was taught by Gamaliel, a high up person in the Sanhedrin. Paul also traveled on these costly trips with an entourage. P. Long mentions that Paul was a tent maker that worked with expensive materials. I would like to know where he learned that or from what text that is found. Paul also had bought a citizenship, which is fairly costly. Paul’s wealth gave him the ability to evangelize easier; at least as far as traveling costs. In a previous post P. Long talks about how Paul spreads the Gospel to gentiles. This is very controversial and differs from the work of the disciples. I wonder if Paul was the guy to spread the Gospel to the opposite spectrum of people compared to the disciples. Most of the people receiving the gospel message earlier in Acts seem to be not wealthy. Some of the people became less poor because of the donations of people around them. I remember seeing something about “there was not a poor one amongst them” or something like that. Instead, Paul preaches to the rich who may not have recieved knowledge of the message from the disciples.
Building upon Long’s analysis, it’s important to consider the socio-economic context of Tarsus, Paul’s birthplace. Tarsus was a prominent city in Cilicia, known for its prosperous trade and educational institutions. The city’s affluence and status as a center of learning might have provided Paul’s family with the means and motivation to secure both Roman citizenship and a high-quality education for their son. This environment could have facilitated Paul’s exposure to diverse cultures and philosophies, shaping his ability to engage with various audiences throughout his ministry.
Moreover, Paul’s trade as a tentmaker (Acts 18:3) offers additional insight into his background. While manual labor was often associated with lower social status, tentmaking in Tarsus involved working with cilicium, a valuable material made from goat hair. This trade could have been a lucrative family business, suggesting that Paul’s skill in this area was not merely a means of subsistence but part of a profitable enterprise (in other words: he wasn’t just a businessman; he was a HUSTLER). This dual identity as a trained scholar and a skilled artisan might have uniquely positioned Paul to navigate various social strata, enabling him to minister effectively to both affluent and impoverished communities.
While definitive evidence of Paul’s familial wealth remains inconclusive, the combination of his Roman citizenship, esteemed education, and association with a potentially lucrative trade supports the hypothesis of an affluent background. This perspective enriches our understanding of Paul’s ability to traverse diverse social contexts in his missionary work, highlighting how his upbringing and skills facilitated his outreach to a wide spectrum of society.