Corpus-Paul

[Edgar Krentz <ekrentz AT lstc.edu>]

Rrichard Fellows wrote
>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.

A Latin name does not necessarily indicate Roman citeizenship. Manummitted
slaves regularly too ttheir name from the earliere ownders, but without
automatically being citizens.

And, at least in the second century, Greeks who became citizens did not
automateically have to take a Latin name.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Edgar Krentz
Professor of New Testament Emeritus
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 E. 55th Street
Chicago, IL 60615  USA
773-256-0752
e-mail: ekrentz AT lstc.edu (Office)
        emkrentz AT mcs.com (Home)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++