Comments on NT/History Blog: Pauline Chronology

2010-11-13T20:04:07.538-06:00

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians, Philippians - ...

2009-11-14T13:44:32.608-06:00
Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians, Philippians - 60 to 62 AD - The turnover from Felix to Festus in 59 puts Paul's arrival in Rome in early 60 and his release at 62.

TC, I said Paul was in prison in Rome from 60 to 62, which puts my dating of these four letters in the Roman imprisonment. Sorry if that was less than clear.

Also, on James, the fact that he does not mention Gentiles OR circumcision only means he did not want to mention either subject. Jerusalem knew about Antioch's Gentile believers since about 37 AD, when Barnabas went there.

Nobody puts James before 37 on the argument that he doesn't mention Gentiles. Therefore, nobody should put James before the council because he doesn't mention circumcision. For whatever reason, James simply decided it was best for his audience to avoid mentioning both topics.

Bill, I just reread your chronology. Really good. ...

2009-11-14T12:46:45.903-06:00
Bill,
I just reread your chronology. Really good.

Well, Bornkamm is the first I've putting "Philippians" somewhere else than Rome, during Paul's first imprisonment. But you put them all elsewhere. Ha!

I'm still chewing on your Titus scenario.

James continues to be an anomaly. James must have preceded the Council, for circumcision was too important an issue not to appeal to his pen. My take.

It also has a map.

Here is another account of the trip from Fair Havens, from Jefferson White, with bibliography and footnotes.

Now then, I'm no sailor, but my understanding ...

2009-11-12T13:06:58.141-06:00
Now then, I'm no sailor, but my understanding is this:

Leaving Myra (SW tip of Asia Minor) you can tack to the SW under a NW-erly wind. Under the cover of Crete, the island's mountains blocked the wind a little bit, but sailing due west along Crete's south coast was apparently still fairly difficult. From Lasia, Phoenix could have been several days of sailing, because they'd have to tack *into* the wind, because PHoenix was not only west, but also slightly north, after passing around the cape just beyond Fair Havens.

I shouldn't say what the captain "expected". However. What the captain did do was persuade the centurion that the ship could reach Phoenix. But since Phoenix was not so very far away, why should this decision even have required justification? For the reasons I have just shown, above. And of course, as history bears this out.

Altogether, it seems clear the task of getting from Lasia to Phoenix was hardly without risk. The captain certainly wasn't expecting the NE-rly "Euraquilon" (27:14) but he knew there was danger.

In short, as I said, there are reasons he didn't think they could get as far as Italy.

:-)

First of all, a correction: In the fourth comment...

2009-11-12T13:02:56.069-06:00
First of all, a correction:

In the fourth comment of this thread I mistakenly said Phoenix was 20 or 30 nautical miles "further east". I should have said it was further west.

Apologies for the mistake.

Don't forget that the captain wasn't expec...

2009-11-12T12:13:12.942-06:00
Don't forget that the captain wasn't expecting this trouble, suggesting the winds were abnormal. My guess would be that they all left Myra in mid-September expecting to have fair winds, but in fact the August winds (which had already been against them when they passed Cyprus, v.4) kept blowing against them until they reached Fair Havens just after Yom Kippur in early October.

Yes. It's plausible. Looking at the Greek ...

2009-11-12T08:21:57.301-06:00
Yes. It's plausible.

Looking at the Greek of 27:9, the word 'ikanou' means "sufficient" or "enough". It sounds like a reference to the fact that they were waiting on the wind to die down.

According to Lionel Casson, the Etesian Winds (NW-erlies) were particularly fierce each August. But we're beyond August. How much beyond August? That depends.

Yom Kippur in 59 AD was on October 6th (if Lunar reckoning holds; but if Passover started on March 18th, just before the Equinox, which was possible in those days according to Beckwith, then Yom Kippur in 59 AD was about September 6th.)

If the Passover was early, then Yom Kippur just after the end of August could make more sense here. In that scenario, the winds kept up for a week or so beyond August, and an early September departure from Fair Havens would support the captain's decision to go a short distance farther, but wouldn't really explain why he didn't think he could make it across to Italy. (Extra caution? Bad weather coming early? The captain was spooked a bit by Paul's prediction?)

If Yom Kippur was in early October, it completely explains the captain's decision, but doesn't explain why the rough winds lasted so long. On the other hand, if the winds really continued to blow for those extra five weeks (something like a 100-year storm?) there would be "considerable time" for Titus to find Paul... but if they'd been waiting for oh so long, I'd expect Luke to use a different word than "enough".

Wphew.

Of course it's all a bit hazy, but the point is there are possibilities.

If Paul died in 64, Titus must have been with him at Fair Havens, somehow, at least briefly. We've got two or three plausible options for how he could have been there.

That'll do.

Thanks again for the push, Peter. :-)

Thanks, Bill. I was largely thinking off the top o...

2009-11-12T03:34:58.274-06:00
Thanks, Bill. I was largely thinking off the top of my head, so not everything fits together. I think the "considerable time" of Acts 27:9 refers not to time as Fair Havens but to the delays of vv.7-8a, "much time had been lost" (RSV). But a few days at Fair Havens, waiting for the south wind of v.13, could have allowed time for Titus to arrive.

Brian - Glad to hear it. I live to serve. ...

2009-11-11T18:03:26.960-06:00
Brian - Glad to hear it. I live to serve. :-)

TC - the prison letters are still from Paul's first Roman imprisonment - 60 to 62. Also, 2 of the 3 "apostolic-als" are still after the prison letters. They're simply no longer draped in several years of vague pseudo-contextuality.

I realize I just wrote a whole booklet but slow down a bit when you read, brother! ;-)

Peter - I love how you're thinking but there are a few problems. Paul says "I left you in Crete", which sure sounds like he's no longer on that island. More tellingly, Paul speaks of sending Artemas and Tychicus, and urges Titus to come to him at Nicopolis around (next?) winter. Most critically, if Paul had been writing while still under arrest, he could not have "decided" to spend the winter anywhere.

On Geography: The Barrington Atlas shows Lasaia on the eastern edge of "Kaloi Limenes" (Fair Havens, or Good/Beautiful Harbor) itself. Phoenix, which they never actually reached, was 20 or 30 nautical miles further east. The larger cities of Crete were on the north coast and it could have been 20 to 80 miles to wherever Titus was - and that's a favorable range, because at least Fair Havens is in the center of the south coast.

Peter again: In the end, you're right that it's simpler to suggest Titus never left. Luke says they passed "considerable time" at Fair Havens. If that lasted as long as a week or two, Titus absolutely could have been sent for and brought. Very nice indeed! (Thank you!)

Btw, I admit once again I would be over reaching to insist on explaining Luke's silence about Titus, but it is very tempting. (And oh, so dramatic!)

:-)

This is awesome. very helpful!

2009-11-11T16:57:13.620-06:00
This is awesome. very helpful!

Interesting. I don't have time now for the det...

2009-11-11T16:55:21.806-06:00
Interesting. I don't have time now for the details. But perhaps it is simpler to suggest that Titus never left Crete.

We don't know how long Paul's ship was at Fair Havens - it could well have been several days, enough time to restock and make decisions. This would also have been time for Paul to send for Titus if he was not far away - perhaps in nearby Lasea, which might explain why Luke mentioned the city. Maybe Titus had only just arrived when Paul unexpectedly and reluctantly left. Maybe they planned to meet up again soon in Phoenix.

The result might be that Titus was not properly briefed for his task, explaining why Paul has to write a more detailed briefing in Titus 1:5ff. The problem then is that most of this letter would fit best if written straight away, but 3:12 then doesn't fit.

There does seem to be some evidence that there was a Nicopolis in Crete. If so, could this have been another name for Phoenix? In that case possibly Paul's letter was a hurried one given to Titus just before he set sail from Fair Havens, if perhaps they had only had a brief meeting there.

Bill, great start. Yeah, a bit more support needed...

2009-11-11T16:36:22.518-06:00
Bill, great start. Yeah, a bit more support needed, as you noted.

I was esp. interested in the when and where of "The Prison Letters."

So out with the traditional "Prison Letters" from Rome, during Paul's first imprisonment?

No "Pastoral Letters" after Paul's time in Rome. Interesting!

Comments on NT/History Blog: Pauline Chronology

Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians, Philippians - ...

Bill, I just reread your chronology. Really good. ...

It also has a map.

Here is another account of the trip from Fair Havens, from Jefferson White, with bibliography and footnotes.

Now then, I'm no sailor, but my understanding ...

First of all, a correction: In the fourth comment...

Don't forget that the captain wasn't expec...

Yes. It's plausible. Looking at the Greek ...

Thanks, Bill. I was largely thinking off the top o...

Brian - Glad to hear it. I live to serve. ...

This is awesome. very helpful!

Interesting. I don't have time now for the det...

Bill, great start. Yeah, a bit more support needed...