Freethought & Rationalism Archive

PhilosopherJay · 02-27-2010, 12:24 PM

Hi All,

I would vote for a maker of banquets. It seems to me that tentmaker would be a useless occupation for people living in Roman cities. Theater troops would most likely make their own props and scenery. As often happens today, probably the theater troop would all pitch in to produce it. The first reference to property-masters in theater is not until 1831.
On the other hand, a banquet maker, or entertainment director as we might call someone today, would be in high demand throughout the cities of the Roman Empire. Watch the movie Vatel (Joffe, 2000) with Gerard Depardieu to see how valuable and important a good banquet director could be.

John Dominic Crossan has emphasized the importance of the Agape meal in solidifying the early Church. One can see that arranging such banquets would have been an important aspect of the duties of the early apostles, perhaps more important than any of the doctrines.

In 1 Corinthians, Paul has apparently given advice on how to run an agape feast (11:2 "keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.") and proceeds to answer questions regarding that advice.

The constant theme about Jews eating with gentiles also points perhaps towards this occupation.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

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:

arnoldo · 02-27-2010, 12:42 PM

Paul was a professional author of fictional stories financed by the Roman Senate to abolish Judaism and/or develop a religion to help unify the Roman Empire.

Toto · 02-27-2010, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Paul was a author of fictional stories financed by the Roman Senate to abolish Judaism and/or develop a religion to help unify the Roman Empire.

I don't think you believe this. Are you just trying to be silly?

arnoldo · 02-27-2010, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

Paul was a author of fictional stories financed by the Roman Senate to abolish Judaism and/or develop a religion to help unify the Roman Empire.

I don't think you believe this. Are you just trying to be silly?

Is it any sillier than Paul being a caterer? He did write against those who would participate in church meetings just to get drunk or for some free food.

Quote:

0When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat, 21for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. 22Don't you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not!. . . So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for each other. 34If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.
1 Corinthians 11

If anything, Paul was writing against those who saw these events as an all you can eat buffet.

Toto · 02-27-2010, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

...
Is it any sillier than Paul being a caterer?

Yes it is, and you don't endorse the position. And your post is not funny enough to be satire.

Quote:

He did write against those who would participate in church meetings just to get drunk or for some free food.

...1 Corinthians 11 ...

If anything, Paul was writing against those who saw these events as an all you can eat buffet.

How is this inconsistent with being a banquet manager?

Not that I think he was, but it's not a ridiculous proposition.

ApostateAbe · 02-27-2010, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

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.

OK, are these arguments Welborn's arguments? For example, does Welborn think that Gamaliel would not have advocated Saul's style of persecuting Christians? And, does he think that the author of Acts was a writer of the second century and not the author of Luke?

arnoldo · 02-27-2010, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

...
Is it any sillier than Paul being a caterer?

Yes it is, and you don't endorse the position. And your post is not funny enough to be satire.

Quote:

He did write against those who would participate in church meetings just to get drunk or for some free food.

...1 Corinthians 11 ...

If anything, Paul was writing against those who saw these events as an all you can eat buffet.

How is this inconsistent with being a banquet manager?

Not that I think he was, but it's not a ridiculous proposition.

Ok.

Toto · 02-27-2010, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

...
OK, are these arguments Welborn's arguments? For example, does Welborn think that Gamaliel would not have advocated Saul's style of persecuting Christians? And, does he think that the author of Acts was a writer of the second century and not the author of Luke?

He doesn't discuss these, but these are standard arguments. Notice that Welborn is careful to say that "if" there is any historical value to that part of Acts, so he realizes that this is a questionable proposition. The scholarly consensus among non-evangelicals, including historicists, is that Acts was written in the early second century and is not reliable as a source of history.

spamandham · 02-28-2010, 09:25 PM

If Paul was a performer, this would explain

Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified...

02-28-2010, 09:25 PM	#19
spamandham Contributor Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 11,525	If Paul was a performer, this would explain Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified...

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

02-27-2010, 12:42 PM	#12
arnoldo Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Latin America Posts: 4,066	Paul was a professional author of fictional stories financed by the Roman Senate to abolish Judaism and/or develop a religion to help unify the Roman Empire.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.