Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Sosthenes was Crispus

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: rfellows AT intergate.ca
  • To: <corpus-paul AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Sosthenes was Crispus


Fellow listers,

Back in 1992 Dale Allison showed that ancient writers often referred to the
same person by different names in the same text, sometimes in a way that
seems strange to the modern ear (1). My own work confirmed this (2). Examples
from the NT are Cephas-Peter in Galatians, Titus-Timothy in 2 Corinthians,
and John-Mark in Acts.

I propose that Crispus-Sosthenes is another example.

The name "Crispus" appears at Acts 18:8 and 1 Cor 1:4. He was the
ARCISUNAGWGOS and was baptized by Paul. The name "Sosthenes" appears at Acts
18:17 and 1 Cor 1:1. He was the ARCISUNAGWGOS and he (or another Sosthenes)
became a believer.

By equating Sosthenes with Crispus we can finally make sense of Acts 18:1-17.
Luke is saying that Paul set up a rival congregation right next to the
Synagogue, and Crispus-Sosthenes, the Synagogue official, defected to Paul's
camp, and many others followed. This was hard for the non-defecting Jews to
take, so they made an attack on Paul. When this failed they vented their
anger on Crispus-Sosthenes, who was one of Paul's most important allies.

I suggest that by using the word ARCISUNAGWGOS again in 18:17, and by using
the article again, Luke signals to the reader that "Sosthenes" is to be
equated with the aforementioned Crispus.

The Crispus-Sosthenes hypothesis has the following advantages over the usual
two-person hypothesis:

1) It disambiguates Acts 18:17. If the reader is not to understand Sosthenes
to be Crispus then the passage is hopelessly ambiguous. We are left to guess
why Sosthenes was beaten. Why didn't Luke clarify?

2) It makes the person who was beaten up a believer, and this fits the
pattern of all the other similar passages in Acts. Luke tells many stories of
believers being attacked, but very few of non-believers being attacked. A
particularly close parallel can be found in Acts 17:1-9. There too we are
told that the Jews became jealous and tried to attack Paul, that they failed,
and that they then vented their anger on one of Paul's associates. If, on the
other hand, Sosthenes is not to be equated with Crispus, then Luke surely
intends for the reader to assume that Sosthenes is not a believer in Christ,
and this would make the passage unprecedented in Acts.

3) It removes the coincidence of having two ARCISUNAGWGOI in the same
passage.

4) It removes the coincidence of having two Corinthians called Sosthenes. (or
two ARCISUNAGWGOI who became believers). For the Sosthenes of 1 Cor 1:1 is a
believer.

5) If Sosthenes is not be be understood to be Crispus then 18:17 seems to
contradict 18:8. In one verse we are told that Crispus is the ARCISUNAGWGOS,
while in the other we are told that Sosthenes is the ARCISUNAGWGOS. This is
odd. Why doesn't Luke clarify by writing something like "the official of
another synagogue", or "the next official of the synagogue"? (This problem
has led some scholars to propose that Luke combined different stories here,
and this has led them to some novel chronologies of Paul's life).

6) Crispus-Sosthenes left Corinth and moved to Ephesus where he appears with
Paul in 1 Cor 1:1. This explains why the name "Crispus" is not mentioned in
Romans.

How, then, did one person acquire the names "Crispus", and "Sosthenes". I
suggest that Crispus adopted the name "Sosthenes" at or around the time of
his baptism. Sosthenes means saviour, strong, or powerful. Perhaps Paul named
Crispus "strong" in much the same way that Jesus named Simon "rock".

(1) "Peter and Cephas: one and the same", JBL 111, p489-495.
(2) "Was Titus Timothy?", JSNT 81 (2001) p33-58.

Richard Fellows
Winnipeg
Canada




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page