Corpus-Paul

["Revd Dr Sean F. Winter" <Sean.Winter AT Virgin.Net>]

> Richard Fellows wrote
> 
> Both Epaphroditus (Phil 2.25; 4.18) and Epaphras (Phm 23; Col. 1:7; 4:12)
> were co-workers of Paul, and both were with him during an imprisonment.
> This suggests to me that he was probably one person. Epaphras is probably a
> short form of Epaphroditus, and Paul is known to have used different names
> for the same person from time to time.
> 
> Sean Winter offered a counter arguement:
> <<Paul's language about them in each case suggests that they are a members
> of the Philippian and Colossian communities respectively.>>
> 
> However, I think this argument is weak.
> 
 Note I only say that Paul¹s language ³suggests²...  To be honest I am not
much  fussed either way, but for what it is worth:
> 
> 1. Firstly, it overlooks the possibility that Epaphras-Epaphroditus
> belonged to both Philippi and Colossae. He may have been a native of
> Colossae who became a resident of Philippi (or vice versa). Epaphras had
> brought the faith to Colossae, so he must have spent some time in another
> town where he came into contact with believers. This other town could well
> have been Philippi, where there were converts from a relatively early date.
> Isn't it possible that Epaphras-Epaphroditus emigrated from Colossae to
> Philippi where he became a believer after Paul brought the faith to that
> city? Lydia (Acts 16.14) provides a close parallel. She was a native of the
> province of Asia who became a resident of Philippi and converted to the 
> faith.
> 
> In short, Epaphas may well have maintained residence in the town where he
> learned the faith, and that town could well have been Philippi.
> 
This is, of course, a possibilty, although we have no way of knowing.
> 
> 2. Secondly, Sean Winter's argument is weakened if Colossians is
> psuedonymous. The author might not have known where Epaphras came from.
> 
This is also a fair point, although the author does imply such knowledge.
Epaphras is HO EX HUMWN (4.12)
> 
> 3. Thirdly, there is no proof that Epaphroditus was a resident of Philippi.
> 
 Again, this is strictly speaking correct.  But again the language of Phil
2.25 HUMWN DE APOSTOLON suggests that E. was a member and thus messenger of
the Philippian community.
> 
 I stand, then, by the claim that the language in each case (note the
identical pronouns) ³suggests² two different people relating to two
different communities.

Sean Winter
> 
-- 
REVD DR SEAN F. WINTER
Northern Baptist College,
Luther King House,
Brighton Grove,
Rusholme,
Manchester,
M14 5JP.

0161 249 2534 (Personal Line + Voicemail)
0161 224 6404 (Luther King House Reception)
0161 248 9201 (Luther King House Fax)

sean.winter AT lkh.co.uk
sean.winter AT virgin.net