Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 02-26-2010, 02:39 PM

I have been reading Welborn's Paul, the Fool of Christ: A Study of 1 Corinthians 1-4 in the Comic-philosophic Tradition (or via: amazon.co.uk) (on googlebooks here.) On p. 11-2 there is this intriguing suggestion:

Quote:

Readers of the revised article on σκηνοποιός in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Frederick Danker will make the surprising discovery that the traditional understanding of the term used to describe Paul's occupation in Acts 18.3 as 'tentmaker' is whole without lexical support outside the Bible and literature that the Bible has influenced, and furthermore is undermined by a variety of practical considerations.⁹⁰ Instead, Danker proposed the meaning 'maker of stage properties',⁹¹ appealing to Pollus, who explains that the word is a synonym for μεχανοποιός, which is either a 'stagehand' who moves stage properties or a 'manufacturer of stage properties.'⁹² Danker concludes: 'In the absence of any use of the term σκηνοποιός, beyond the passages in Pullux and the Hermetic Writings, and the lack of specific qualifiers in the text of Acts 18.3, one is left with the strong probability that Luke's publics in urban areas, where theatrical productions were in abundance, would think of σκηνοποιός in reference to matters theatrical.'⁹³ If the report of Paul's occupation in Acts 18.3 is historically reliable, then Paul was a 'prop maker.' This would go far to explain the number, specificity, and richness of Pauline metaphors drawn from the world of the theater and amphitheater. . .

[93] … Danker continues: 'In addition, Acts 20:34; 1 Cor 4.12; 1 Thess 2.9; 2 Thess 3.8 indicate that Paul's work was of a technical nature and was carried out in metropolitan areas, where there would be a large demand for such kind of work.'

avi · 02-26-2010, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frederick Danker

Thess 3.8 indicate that Paul's work was of a technical nature and was carried out in metropolitan areas, where there would be a large demand for such kind of work.

Or, if Paul is a fictional character, then, he needs some sort of occupation...right? Any will do.

Where is the evidence that Paul actually lived? Yeah, we have his letters, earliest from Papyrus 46, third century. We have mention in several "patristic" documents. How many of them were forged in the fourth century? If his correspondence with Seneca is judged specious, then, why not assume his existence is fictional? Where is the conclusive proof that he lived, proof obviously, derived from outside the New Testament?

avi

DCHindley · 02-26-2010, 05:05 PM

That is one of four basic meanings of the work SKHNH (skEnE):

Per Liddell & Scott
[I.] a covered place, a tent, Hdt., Soph., etc.:-in pl. a camp, Lat. castra, Aesch., Xen.
2. generally, a dwelling-place, house, temple, Eur.
II. a wooden stage for actors, Plat.:-in the regular theatre, the skhnh, was a wall at the back of the stage, with doors for entrance and exit; the stage (in our sense) was proskhnion or logeion, the sides or wings paraskhnia, and the wall under the stage, fronting the orchestra, uposkhnia.
2. oi apo skhnhs [those upon a stage], the actors, players, Dem.
3. to epi skhnhs meros that which is actually represented on the stage, Arist.; ta apo ths skhnhs (sc. asmata), odes sung on the stage, Id.
4. metaph. stage-effect, unreality, skhnh pas o bios 'all the world's a stage,' Anth.
III. the tented cover, tilt of a wagon, Aesch., Xen.: also a bed-tester, Dem.
IV. an entertainment given in tents, a banquet, Xen.

Seems to me he could have made stages, tents, booths, or was a caterer. "Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food" (1 Cor 6:13). He probably refers to food more than to theatrical technical terms.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I have been reading Welborn's Paul, the Fool of Christ: A Study of 1 Corinthians 1-4 in the Comic-philosophic Tradition (or via: amazon.co.uk) (on googlebooks here.) On p. 11-2 there is this intriguing suggestion:

Quote:

Readers of the revised article on σκηνοποιός in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Frederick Danker will make the surprising discovery that the traditional understanding of the term used to describe Paul's occupation in Acts 18.3 as 'tentmaker' is whole without lexical support outside the Bible and literature that the Bible has influenced, and furthermore is undermined by a variety of practical considerations.⁹⁰ Instead, Danker proposed the meaning 'maker of stage properties',⁹¹ appealing to Pollus, who explains that the word is a synonym for μεχανοποιός, which is either a 'stagehand' who moves stage properties or a 'manufacturer of stage properties.'⁹² Danker concludes: 'In the absence of any use of the term skhnopoios, beyond the passages in Pullux and the Hermetic Writings, and the lack of specific qualifiers in the text of Acts 18.3, one is left with the strong probability that Luke's publics in urban areas, where theatrical productions were in abundance, would think of σκηνοποιός in reference to matters theatrical.'⁹³ If the report of Paul's occupation in Acts 18.3 is historically reliable, then Paul was a 'prop maker.' This would go far to explain the number, specificity, and richness of Pauline metaphors drawn from the world of the theater and amphitheater. . .

[93] … Danker continues: 'In addition, Acts 20:34; 1 Cor 4.12; 1 Thess 2.9; 2 Thess 3.8 indicate that Paul's work was of a technical nature and was carried out in metropolitan areas, where there would be a large demand for such kind of work.'

Toto · 02-26-2010, 07:54 PM

The skhnh was originally a temporary structure behind the stage where actors put on their masks. It evolved into the "scenery" at the back of the stage.

Thus you have

Quote:

[I.] a covered place, a tent, Hdt., Soph., etc.:-in pl. a camp, Lat. castra, Aesch., Xen.
2. generally, a dwelling-place, house, temple, Eur.

Why then does Danker state that ". . . . 'tentmaker' is whole without lexical support outside the Bible and literature that the Bible has influenced" ?

What would be the motive for turning Paul into either a tentmaker or a stage prop maker?

Chili · 02-26-2010, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The skhnh was originally a temporary structure behind the stage where actors put on their masks. It evolved into the "scenery" at the back of the stage.

Thus you have

Quote:

[I.] a covered place, a tent, Hdt., Soph., etc.:-in pl. a camp, Lat. castra, Aesch., Xen.
2. generally, a dwelling-place, house, temple, Eur.

Why then does Danker state that ". . . . 'tentmaker' is whole without lexical support outside the Bible and literature that the Bible has influenced" ?

What would be the motive for turning Paul into either a tentmaker or a stage prop maker?

He was an imposter? or a good actor or a big sinner who rode a high horse?

DCHindley · 02-26-2010, 10:30 PM

I think he is speaking of the actual word in Acts 18:3, skhnopoioi, made up from SKENE (tent, enclosure, stage, banquet) + POIEW (to make, to do). While Greek speakers made up compound words all the time, this particular compound word is not used at all in the Lxx or non-Christian literature.

Per Liddell & Scott. POIEW:

Used in two general senses, to make and to do.
A. [I.1] to make, produce, create, in Hom. often of building; of smith's work Il.; of works of art, Ib., etc.; to make of, Hdt.; to build them ..., Il.; also, to have a thing made, get it made, Hdt., Dem.
2. to make, create, Dem.
3. of Poets, to compose, write, (old English to make), Hdt., Att.:-also, to make or represent in poetry, Plat.: to describe in verse, Id.: to put into verse, Id.
II. to bring to pass, bring about, cause, Hom., etc.: c. acc. et inf. to cause or bring about that . . , Od., etc.
2. of sacrifices, and the like, Hdt., Xen., Thuc., etc.; to hold the Isthmian games, Xen.; (as we say, to make a house), Thuc.:-Med. in same sense, but implying indirect action, Il.
3. of war and peace, to cause a war, but, to make war (on one's own part), Xen.;-so, to bring about a peace (for others); but, to make peace (for oneself), etc.
4. the Med. is often used periphr. with Nouns, to make account of. . , Id.; but, to hold a conference, Thuc.
III. with an Adj. as predic. to make so and so, to make one senseless, Od.; to make them blest, i.e. prosper them, Ib.; :-Med., to take her to oneself as wife, Il.; to make him one's son, i.e. to adopt him as son, Ib., Att.:-also, to make a thing one's own, Hdt.
IV. to put, Hom.; Hdt.
2. in war, to bring under the power of. . , Dem.:-Med., Hdt.; Id., etc.
V. in Med. to hold, deem, consider, reckon, esteem a thing as. . , to take it for a visitation, Id.; to deem it a great matter that. . , Id.; Thuc., etc.:-often with Preps., to hold as naught, Soph.; Hdt.; Dem.; Xen.; Att.
VI. to put the case assume, that. . , Hdt., Xen.:-Pass., those who are reputed. . , Plat.
VII. of Time, to make no long time, i.e. not to delay, Dem.; to spend it under arms, Thuc.
B. to do, Hom., etc.; Dem.; to act like a Spartan, Hdt.; Soph., etc.
2. c. acc. dupl. to do something to another, Hdt., etc.; also Xen., etc.:-also c. dat. pers., Id.; so in Med., Hdt.
3. with an Adv., do thus, Id.; Xen.;-so with a partic., Hdt., etc.: is sometimes almost Adverbial, Dem.; fortunately, Id.
II. absol. to be doing, to do or act, to do or have done to one, Hdt.:-of medicine, to work, operate, Plat.; so, good-will made greatly for the Lacedaemonians, Thuc.; so impers., it was the general character of the one to be landsmen, etc., Id.

I suppose one could create a large number of possible meanings from those two words combined.

In the Lxx, SKHNH often refers to the portable tent housing the ark of the covenant. The author of Acts may have wanted to suggest that Paul was involved in making a new covenant.

Danker may have wanted to develop Paul's statement in Galatians 3:1 "before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified." The author of Acts might have also been developing this statement in Galatians, if one holds to the idea that Acts followed the letter of Galatians and was known to the author of Acts as well. I find it hard to believe he was making his living putting on plays or building sets for plays, especially that he would be staging passion plays to instruct his followers.

Paul seems to know a lot of city officials and had ties to one (or more) of the Herodian households. I assume he was some sort of retainer to the rich and powerful. That means he is doing something for them. What do rich and powerful folks like to do? Party. Banquet-maker starts to make more sense.

Then again, he constanty uses military terms. However, Jews were exempt from conscription into the Roman army. Armies on the march live in tents. Both the letters and Acts say he spent time in Arabia. What do semi-nomadic Arabs live in? Tents. Tent-maker does make sense.

Maybe, like Li'l Abner in the comics, he was a bed-tester. Better yet, bed-maker, making him a domestic servant. Ahh, I love being creative.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The skhnh was originally a temporary structure behind the stage where actors put on their masks. It evolved into the "scenery" at the back of the stage.

Thus you have

Quote:

[I.] a covered place, a tent, Hdt., Soph., etc.:-in pl. a camp, Lat. castra, Aesch., Xen.
2. generally, a dwelling-place, house, temple, Eur.

Why then does Danker state that ". . . . 'tentmaker' is whole without lexical support outside the Bible and literature that the Bible has influenced" ?

What would be the motive for turning Paul into either a tentmaker or a stage prop maker?

arnoldo · 02-27-2010, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I have been reading Welborn's Paul, the Fool of Christ: A Study of 1 Corinthians 1-4 in the Comic-philosophic Tradition (or via: amazon.co.uk) (on googlebooks here.) On p. 11-2 there is this intriguing suggestion:

Quote:

Readers of the revised article on σκηνοποιός in A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Frederick Danker will make the surprising discovery that the traditional understanding of the term used to describe Paul's occupation in Acts 18.3 as 'tentmaker' is whole without lexical support outside the Bible and literature that the Bible has influenced, and furthermore is undermined by a variety of practical considerations.⁹⁰ Instead, Danker proposed the meaning 'maker of stage properties',⁹¹ appealing to Pollus, who explains that the word is a synonym for μεχανοποιός, which is either a 'stagehand' who moves stage properties or a 'manufacturer of stage properties.'⁹² Danker concludes: 'In the absence of any use of the term σκηνοποιός, beyond the passages in Pullux and the Hermetic Writings, and the lack of specific qualifiers in the text of Acts 18.3, one is left with the strong probability that Luke's publics in urban areas, where theatrical productions were in abundance, would think of σκηνοποιός in reference to matters theatrical.'⁹³ If the report of Paul's occupation in Acts 18.3 is historically reliable, then Paul was a 'prop maker.' This would go far to explain the number, specificity, and richness of Pauline metaphors drawn from the world of the theater and amphitheater. . .

[93] … Danker continues: 'In addition, Acts 20:34; 1 Cor 4.12; 1 Thess 2.9; 2 Thess 3.8 indicate that Paul's work was of a technical nature and was carried out in metropolitan areas, where there would be a large demand for such kind of work.'

I find it hard to contemplate that Paul never pitched a tent. .

ApostateAbe · 02-27-2010, 11:16 AM

Does Welborn has anything to say against the theory that Paul's original profession was a rabbi or teacher of Judaism? That is the implication of Acts 5:34 and Acts 22:3, and I don't see a good reason to doubt it.

Toto · 02-27-2010, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Does Welborn has anything to say against the theory that Paul's original profession was a rabbi or teacher of Judaism? That is the implication of Acts 5:34 and Acts 22:3, and I don't see a good reason to doubt it.

A good reason would be that the Book of Acts is a book of theology and novelistic entertainment (or via: amazon.co.uk) written in the second century. It contradicts the epistles of Paul on many points, so it is difficult to believe that the Paul or Saul described in Acts has anything to do with the letter-writer.

Besides, the two passages in Acts that you reference are in complete contraction with each other. In 5:34, Gamaliel takes a relatively hands-off stance regarding the Christians. He says that if what they say is from God, there is no sense fighting them, but if it is from man, they will be destroyed in any case. In 22:3, Paul claims to have studied under Gamaliel, but if he did, he slept through some lessons, because in chapter 7 he condones the stoning of Stephen, in chapter 8 he starts to persecute the church, and then in chapter 9 gets a commission to go hunt down these Christians in Damascus.

You will find varying opinions on whether the author of the Pauline letters was trained as a rabbi. Hyam Maccoby describes "Paul's Bungling Attempt At Sounding Pharisaic".

Quote:

Some passages in Paul's Epistles have been thought to be typically Pharisaic simply because their argument has a legalistic air. When these passages are critically examined, however, the superficiality of the legal colouring soon appears, and it is apparent that the use of illustrations from law is merely a vague, rhetorical device, without any real legal precision, such as is found in the Pharisaic writings even when the legal style is used for homiletic biblical exegesis.

Toto · 02-27-2010, 12:14 PM

There is a blog comment on this very section: Paul's Day Job, with a comment on the linguistics.

Quote:

Thucydides does write "σκηνὴν ποιήσαντες" in Book 2 chapter 34 section 2 line 2 of his History. Richard Crawley, translating Thucydides here, says it's "a tent which has been erected," and it might even be "a tent that's been made."

So what is clear is that Thucydides is using the longer phrase the way Luke does of Paul and coworkers, with his shorter phrase: σκηνοποιοὶ.

But I think there is possibly a larger pattern. Jesus is a "carpenter" although he might be a master builder, or a skilled craftsman of legal arguments.

Paul (in Acts) is a maker of "skhnh" - a word that can refer to the scenery of a play, or a temporary structure such as a tent, or symbolically (Strongs 4636) "a hut or temporary residence, i.e. (figuratively) the human body (as the abode of the spirit): --tabernacle." (This is how the word "skhnos" is used in 2 Cor 5:1 and others places.) But I'm not sure how this works out.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-27-2010, 11:16 AM	#8
ApostateAbe Contributor Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: MT Posts: 10,656	Does Welborn has anything to say against the theory that Paul's original profession was a rabbi or teacher of Judaism? That is the implication of Acts 5:34 and Acts 22:3, and I don't see a good reason to doubt it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.