Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Timothy/Titus and circumcision

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Richard Fellows <rfellows AT shaw.ca>
  • To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Timothy/Titus and circumcision
  • Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:00:49 -0800

I had written:
> > I have just found the following passage from the Babylonian Talmud (b.
Yev
> > 45a-b):
> >
> > And Rav also ruled that the child is fit, for once a man appeared before
Rav
> > and asked him, "What [is the legal position of the child] where an
idolator
> > or a slave cohabited with the daughter of an Israelite?"
> > "The child is fit," the Master replied. .....
> > Rav Yehudah also ruled that the child is fit, for when one came before
Rav
> > Yehudah, the latter told him, "Go and conceal your identity or marry one
of
> > your own kind."
> > When such a man appeared before Rava he told him, "Either go abroad or
marry
> > one of your own kind."
> >
> > This passage shows that someone of mixed parentage could pass as a Jew
when
> > traveling away from home.

Jeffrey replied:
> Is the tradition contained within it 1st century?

I don't think so, and I hope not! My understanding is that Rav Yehudah's
dates are 135-219 C.E. Please correct me if I am wrong. Could someone also
comment on when the tradition given above is likely to have originated?

Christine Hayes has shown that Jewish attitudes towards people of mixed
parentage evolved over time (Gentile Impurities and Jewish Identities,
Oxford University Press, 2002). There was a trend towards tolerance. The
Talmud passage above seems to show a tolerance (at least by some) of the
policy of concealing the fact that one's father was a gentile. However,
since the first century would have been stricter, it seems likely that
people then would not have looked favourably on such concealment if it was
found out. This would explain why Luke does not recount the Titus incident:
it had been a public relations disaster for Paul. It would also explain
Paul's agitation in Gal 2:4-5: he had been embarrassed by the incident. So,
my hypothesis about the Titus incident requires that Jews in the first
century looked less favourably on those who attempted to conceal their mixed
parentage. Less favourably, that is, than the Talmud passage. Given the
trend towards tolerance, this makes sense if the Talmud passage represents a
tradition later than the first century, as seems likely.

Does this help, Jeffrey, or do you have other concerns about my use of this
Talmud passage as a possible parallel to the proposed Titus incident?

One might ask why Paul would allow Titus/Timothy to conceal his gentile
parentage. If he were found out people would look suspiciously at all of
Paul's associates thereafter. Why would Paul take that risk? But Acts
21:28-29 shows that people DID look suspiciously at Paul's associates, and
suspected him of concealing the Gentile identity of Trophimus. Also, I
suspect that Paul had more immediate concerns than a long term risk that he
would have been running (such as the end of the world or more immediate
persecution).

Regards,

Richard.






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page