Corpus-Paul

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

Stephen Carlson wrote:
>I think a better approach from a statistical standpoint is to estimate
>the odds that Titus can be identified with each possible candidate, for
>example, Timothy, Silvanus, Apollos, Prisca, Aquila, Mark, Barnabas, 
>Luke, and some otherwise unknown person, and then compare the relative
>probabilities.

>If Titus is thought to be a praenomen to a more commonly used name, the
>the fact that Titus is never so explicitly named in Acts may be attributed
>to use of Titus' other name, and therefore would then be about equally
>possible for all the candidates (expect Prisca), with some slight
>differences in probability (less for Barnabas, I suppose; more for a Titus
>Lucius = Luke?).  Therefore, this evidence from Acts, though perhaps
>suggesting that Titus is another's name, does not sufficiently narrow
>the identification to Timothy rather than Luke, for example.

You are right to point out that there are many names in Acts which one
could, in principle, equate with Titus.  Since we have so many candidates
auditioning for the role of Titus, we need to apply some selection
criteria.  The successful candidate should be a close companion of Paul,
and cannot be a Jew.  These criteria are sufficient, I think, to single out
Timothy as the strongest candidate.  Notice how we find Timothy in the list
of names in Acts 20:4, which is exactly where we would expect to see Titus,
because of his enthusiasm for the collection. (Similarly, we find
'Timothy', and not 'Titus' in Rom 16).

Let's now pull in some further data about Titus to test our suspicions that
he might be Timothy.  One unusual fact about Titus is that he became a
convert and a companion of Paul before the second missionary journey, yet
was still with Paul at least towards the end of the third missionary
journey.  We have the same information concerning Timothy, and it is
noteworthy because we know of no other individual who stayed with Paul for
more than one missionary journey.

In 1 Corinthians we read about the sending of Timothy to Corinth, but in 2
Corinthians we hear only about the return of Titus from Corinth.  The
suspicion that we are looking at one and the same mission is confirmed by
many pieces of data.  For example, consider the timing of the mission(s).
In 1 Cor Paul has sent Timothy while he is preparing to leave Ephesus for
Macedonia.  In 2 Cor Paul receives Titus in Macedonia shortly after leaving
Asia.  The two accounts fit together perfectly. (see my post of 1st July
for my explanation of 2 Cor 2:12-14).

I hope this gives you a taste of some of the evidence for Titus-Timothy.
Any thoughts?  Incidentally, Stephen,  I have given some thought to the
suggestion that Titus was luke and/or the author of Acts, but I find the
positive arguments for the equation of Titus and Timothy too compelling.

Richard Fellows
Vancouver
rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca