Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - RE: Titus = Timothy?

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Richard Fellows <rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Titus = Timothy?
  • Date: Thu, 10 Jun 1999 01:10:40 -0700


Bob MacDonald wrote:

>Richard
>
>With respect to the conjecture that Titus = Timothy, what do you do with the
>data that "Titus was not compelled to be circumcised" (Gal 2:3), and that
>Timothy whose mother was Jewish, but father not, was circumcised (Acts
>16:3)?

Yes, a superficial reading of Gal 2:3 does appear to contradict Acts 16:3
if Titus were Timothy. Indeed, this might be why someone felt it necessary
to omit the OIS OUDE from 2:5 (wanting to harmonise the text with the known
fact of Timothy's circumcision). It may even be the reason why the author
of the PE believed that there must have been another Titus (if he knew
Timothy's other name in the first place, which I doubt), who knows?

Anyway, a closer reading of the passage in its context shows that Paul's
point is not that Titus was never circumcised, but that he was not
compelled to be circumcised at that time in Jerusalem.

Interestingly, William O. Walker has argued that the author of Acts read
Galatians and that Acts 16:1-3 was his interpretation of the Titus
incident. He supposes that 'Luke' transferred the incident from Titus to
Timothy for some reason. (The Timothy-Titus Problem Reconsidered.
Expository Times 91. p 231-235)

All we know with certainty is the Titus was already a convert at the time
of the Gal 2 visit and that he was uncircumcised at that time. This is in
agreement with our data on Timothy, thought it could be coincidental, I
suppose. The issue must be decided by the data in 1 & 2 Cor, and it is
there that the real proofs of the Titus-Timothy hypothesis lie. You can
find the arguments on the Corpus Paulinum Articles for Review site at

http://metalab.unc.edu/corpus-paul/afr/WasTT8w.html

(For a more full discussion of Gal 2:1-5 you might like to look at my post
of 18th April).

Richard Fellows
Vancouver
rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca




  • RE: Titus = Timothy?, Bob MacDonald, 06/10/1999
    • <Possible follow-up(s)>
    • RE: Titus = Timothy?, Richard Fellows, 06/10/1999

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page