Corpus-Paul

["Stephen C. Carlson" <scarlson AT mindspring.com>]

At 10:18 AM 10/9/99 -0700, Bob Schacht wrote:
>At 11:57 AM 10/09/1999 -0400, Stephen C. Carlson wrote:
>>I was reading Jerome the other day and I came across the following passage
>>from Epista 120,11, in which Jerome seems to say that Paul was uncomfortable
>>with eloquent Greek and therefore used Titus as an interpreter/translator
>>just as Peter used Mark:... What basis, if any, is there for believing
>that Paul's
>>letters were written/translated by an aide?  Or, vice versa, what basis is
>>there for believing that Paul himself composed the Greek of his letters?
>
[...]
>So I would rephrase the question as, "Is Romans 16:22 the basis for
>Jerome's allegation, and if not, what is?"

Well, Rom 16:22 identifies Tertius as the one who wrote the latter.  While
this suggests that Tertius was at least an amanuensis, I'm more intrigued
with the possibility that Jerome suggested (if my understanding of the
Latin is correct) that Paul regularly relied on someone, e.g. Titus, to
compose the Greek of his letters.

>So it might help if you would sharpen the focus of your question to avoid
>unnecessary excursions into tangential matters.

I thought my question was fairly focussed on the question of how much of
a role Jerome thought that Paul's aide had in the composition of Paul's
letters, and how can we evaluate the truth of this supposition.

By the way, I have uploaded the Latin and my own English translation (to
avoid copyright problems) of Jerome, Epistula 120,11 to my web site at:
        http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/ext/jerome.htm

Comments and suggestions to improve my English rendering of the Latin
are welcome.

Stephen Carlson
--
Stephen C. Carlson                        mailto:scarlson AT mindspring.com
Synoptic Problem Home Page   http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/
"Poetry speaks of aspirations, and songs chant the words."  Shujing 2.35