Corpus-Paul

[Richard Fellows <rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca>]

John Hurd wrote:
>The other side of the coin is to note that in Acts Paul's citizenship so
>perfectly serves the author's narrative purposes that one must put a
>question mark beside the tradition.

Are we to speculate that Acts was written at a time so distant from the
historical Paul that Luke could invent his Roman citizenship without fear
of contradiction?  This is possible, of course, but I would wonder how the
collective memory could have forgotten such a basic fact about Paul, while
remembering many inconsequential details.  For example, Paul's itinerary
round the Aegean, which I mentioned in an earlier post, is something of no
interest to anyone but the driest historians ;-) , but it was remembered.
Luke also knew about all of Paul's major companions, without exception. :-)

Also, if the author of Acts was free to invent with complete impunity, why
does he not make Paul sell all his goods and give to the poor?  I've often
wondered that.


Earlier I had written:
>There is an abundance of Latin names in the letters, indicating that many
>of Paul's converts and associates were Roman citizens.  Given this and the
>evidence of Acts, it seems very likely that Paul was also a citizen.

And Craig S. de Vos responded:
IMHO that is a non sequitur. Why should the nature of Paul's converts
necessarily say anything about Paul himself? On the other hand, why not
suggest that because Paul converted some Thessalonians he must be a
Thessalonian. Paul's converts and associates came from a variety of
ethnic/religious backgrounds. Of itself this proves nothing.

To which I reply:
Indeed, it proves nothing.  It is a question of probabilities. If the
frequency of Latin names in the letters has been correctly interpreted (see
earlier in this thread), then having a Latin name is evidence of
citizenship for the group under consideration.  I can see no reason why
Paul should be exempt from this statistical argument.  Paul and his two
closest companions (Silvanus and Titus) all had Latin names. Even if we
include Barnabas and Mark in this group we still find a remarkably majority
of Latin names in this circle of missionaries.  It seems likely that, for
whatever reason, many of them were citizens.  Citizenship would have been a
great advantage to missionaries.

Craig S. de Vos also wrote:
If Paul is trying to get the Philippian Christians to rethink their attachment
to and involvement in the Empire, why does he also not refer to his own
experience or putting Christ before his "citizenship"?

I reply:
But he does just that in Phil 3.20, if we take him to be a citizen.  I
wonder if I have misunderstood your point.

cheers,

Richard Fellows
Vancouver
rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca