Why was invented Paul?

[Giuseppe]

I dont' think the man called ''Paul'' really existed because that man could exist insofar he wrote at least a bit of his letters but this would be not the case. No letters, no historical Paul. The two questions are strictly linked.

Though I would say "to have 'the Son in me' is" an alternative theology.

You mean ''is an alternative theology'' (different from marcionite theology) the generic idea that the Spirit of Christ enters within a mortal man from his birth and until here I understand, but note that for marcionites Paul was clearly an exception to this rule.

But I don't understand this:

and I'd say - The redactors acknowledge gnostic origins (or sincretism) through the man called Paul the gnostic dualism between body and spirit.

Can you make more clear that sentence?

[Giuseppe]

In whiletime I read this article:

Whatever the name 'Paul' means, the narrator wants the reader to associate it with the identity of the true People of God - the one filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 13:9). Even if one misses the gap and provide the etymology of the name 'Paul', the critical information is supplied by the statement about the Holy Spirit. We might say that Paul is to be identified as the 'least' one who is filled with the Spirit.

(p.7, my bold)

source: http://place.asburyseminary.edu/cgi/vie ... uryjournal

the article analyzes the link Elyma/Paul.

Beyond that link, I underline the analogy with the view expressed by Dr. Detering on symbolism behind the name 'Paul'.

It's simply impossible that that name is given to Paul since his birth.

Note even another aspect:

In sum we might say that the literary framework and the narrator himself attributes meaning to names because the nature of the conflict turns on identity

(p. 5)

in other terms, pseudoLuke changes 'Saul' in 'Paul' only when he describes the conflict between Paul and the Jewish sourcerer Elymas. That means that the conflict did identify who is really Paul.

This is very similar to my theory expressed in this thread that the name 'Paul' is born from a configuration of conflict between first Christians (Paul as a marcionite reaction to Matthew 5:19).


if 'Paul' is your enemy (and you are a Judaizer), then 'Paul' necessarily means someone to be despised for its smallness (see Matthew 5:19).

if 'Paul' is your friend (and you are Hellenist), then for you implicitly 'Paul' actually means Great (the last is the first).

[Peter Kirby]

It's simply impossible that that name is given to Paul since his birth.

Bullshit.

Don't underestimate the extraordinary fecundity of the 'hive mind' trying to milk all the connections they can out of these texts.

There are going to be plenty of so-called "false positives." This pronounced 'impossibility' is one of them, too-easily the product of a fevered imagination.

Unfortunately the malady is difficult to cure; for those susceptible to it, only a prolonged withdrawal from the source of infection (speculation about the subject) can occasionally give the afflicted a chance to drain their mind of all the wound-up neuronal connections and allow them a fresh perspective... from which they may, appropriately, shrug their shoulders to that which was formerly their passionate proclamation.

[Giuseppe]

Peter, you want me to tell you that you're right, that until here I'm trying as a idiot to connect all the dots together piling fallacies of possibiliter, but in the meantime I found an article where it is noted that the literary use of the name 'Paul' is not neutral with respect to a situation of conflict between Christians of opposing views.

[Peter Kirby]

Peter, you want me to tell you that you're right, that until here I'm trying as a idiot to connect all the dots together piling fallacies of possibiliter, but in the meantime I found an article where it is noted that the literary use of the name 'Paul' is not neutral with respect to a situation of conflict between Christians of opposing views.

No I do not expect anything much from you.

This reply accords with my expectations: more vacuous rambling, signifying nothing.

[Giuseppe]

Patience. I do not think to be a sapientone, I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I have nothing more to say because the evidence is little for me to say other things. Since this moment, if I will submit comments, then I will make only questions and no claims.

[Peter Kirby]

Okay.

[Peter Kirby]

By the way, my point has also not been that it would be somehow 'impossible' for the name 'Paul' to be chanced upon when creating a literary figure of the kind witnessed in the material about 'Paul'. My point has been that the name 'Paul' _by itself_ does not give us any real evidence as to whether this name 'Paul' was _chanced_ upon as the name for the invention or _chanced_ upon as the name for the baby boy or _chanced_ upon as the adopted name of a man. In any case, there is always going to be some uncertainty just going by the name "Paul" alone.

As stated: Real names often happen to have meanings that can be read as being significant. They're like horoscopes that way--chances are, there's something in the description of your sign (or name) that resonates with your personal character, if you look for it--not always, but enough to be very unsurprising. (For that matter, fictive names, just like real names, do not always provide good examples of the ability to read meaning into the name.)

Of course, _if_ we had the evidence to show that "Paul" was an invention, then we could likely assume that the meaning of his name was no coincidence for his inventor, particularly if this inventor also wrote the epistles. But that's all predicated on the _if_. We'd still need to find the real evidence first.

[Giuseppe]

A question.

If in all the NT the term ''Little''/''one littles'' is often compared with his opposite meaning - ''Great''(s) - what do you think about the concrete possibility that was an original situation of conflict along the meanings originally linked to dicothomy ''greats/littles'' among Christians that required the use of nickname ''Paul'' by a specific man/group?

[Secret Alias]

I confess that I haven't read the debate from the beginning but I will say that it is extremely rare for Jews to adopt Latin names in the period. The only example I can think of for males offhand is Marcus and that is only among individuals of the highest rungs of society. Greek yes, Latin not so much.