Apparently, the principal objection against this thesis was the explicit mention by Papias of “the things either said or done by the Lord”. The generic messianic prophecies and oracles could be co-opted by Papias in the form: “Jesus said X”. But the acts?"Logiôn kuriakôn exègèseis" is translated generally as :
The French mythicist Alfaric translated it as:
If the latter was the original sense , then Papias reported only presumed prophecies and oracles concerning the Christ (who had therefore an entirely passive role as not the author of these sayings).
Really, there is a particular way by which also the acts of other people could be co-opted by Papias as acts “of Jesus”. An example of this co-optation is under the our same eyes, in the gospel of Mark:
A similar operation was done by Papias:
A clue of this is the following info:
In 1 John 2 we read about the connection acts of apostles = acts of Christ:
The same logic is applied by Papias: who works as Christ, then he is someone who has "known" Christ. Hence the his acts become virtually the acts of Christ.
An objection may be that the author of 1 John 2:2-6 didn't mean "know Christ" in a literal sense, but Eusebius secures us about the obtuse Papias's literalism: