Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - RE: [Corpus-Paul] Gaius Titius Justus a.k.a. Stephanas

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Doug Chaplin" <lists AT actually.me.uk>
  • To: "'Corpus-Paul'" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: RE: [Corpus-Paul] Gaius Titius Justus a.k.a. Stephanas
  • Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 21:45:19 +0100

Richarrd Fellows said:

>Doug wrote:

> The biggest problem is that Paul gives no hint that he renames anyone.

>>Why is this a problem? What sort of hint would you expect, and why?
>>If Paul renamed everyone in his churches we would expect to find some
>>reference to the practice in his letters, but that is not what is being
>>proposed. We have about 80 names of associates of Paul, and I believe that
>>between three and six of them received new names from Paul. The candidates
>>are Crispus-Sosthenes, Titus-Timothy, Gaius Titius Justus-Stephanas, and,
>>more speculatively, Onesimus, Sopater, and Theophilus. None of these
>>individuals were ever among Paul's addressees, and they represent a very
>>small fraction of those in his churches. I am therefore not at all
>>surprised that there is no direct reference to renaming in Paul's
>>writings.

First, why rename sporadically, when the names are not obvious puns?
The examples you give of renaming in the Palestinian Jesus movement all come
with an explanation tied to specific circumstances or characteristics of the
person renamed. What you have not offered, that I can see, is an explanation
for why these proposed Pauline renamings have been made at all. There is
nothing obvious to link the pairs. They are possible, but nothing proves
them. It's simply that without some sort of evidence I can't feel persuaded
by your theory.

I see little reason to identify Crispus with Sosthenes from Acts, preferring
to see the one as preceding the other in the same role (the text gives them
both the same title, but seems to treat them as different people), and
therefore also nothing to identify the Jewish Sosthenes of Acts with the
co-writer / scribe of 1 Cor.

I have never yet been persuaded by the Timothy Titus equation.

While I think it not at all implausible that Gaius is indeed Gaius Titius
Justus, even that identification is unproven, and I can see little to link
him with Stephanas. Rather, it seems to me that the mention of baptising
Gaius, followed by the "oh yes, I did baptise the household of Stephanas"
suggests exactly the opposite.

In short, a) I can't really see why the renaming idea emerges in the first
place and b) I can't see any single clear piece of evidence for it in
Pauline circles.

Doug





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page