tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post6289478928853385598..comments2024-03-08T18:04:37.943-08:00Comments on Paul and co-workers: Erastus (Rom 16:23) was Erastus (Acts 19:22)Richard Fellowshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06777460488456330838noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post-75071381196713515712013-09-04T21:22:37.880-07:002013-09-04T21:22:37.880-07:00Timothy A. Brookins has just published a paper on ...Timothy A. Brookins has just published a paper on the frequency of the name "Erastus". "The (In)frequency of the Name 'Erastus' in Antiquity: A Literary, Papyrological, and Epigraphical Catalog" New Test. Stud. 59, pp. 496-516. He gives similar statistics to me and comes to a similar conclusion. I hope that his paper will lay to rest the idea that the Erastus of Acts could be different from the Erastus of Romans.<br /><br />It is disappointing that he was not able to calculate, or even comment on, the (all important) absolute frequency of the name. It's encouraging, though, that he cited several electronic resources, including this blog post.Richard Fellowshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06777460488456330838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post-28161163064082727462011-11-10T20:31:39.929-08:002011-11-10T20:31:39.929-08:00Thanks. I forgot to answer your question about the...Thanks. I forgot to answer your question about the number of entries in the LGPN from the first century. I laboriously counted cases in a cross-section of pages from the printed volumes. Quite exhausting.<br /><br />I might need some help with methodological justification. However, I do find support in Clement and Ignatius for my view that the greeters in Rom 16:21-23 (including Erastus) were people who had travelled. See <a href="http://paulandco-workers.blogspot.com/2011/06/ignatius-women-greeters-and-lucius-as.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. I have also discussed Lucius, Jason, and Gaius at length in other blog posts, which support the view that they had traveled.Richard Fellowshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06777460488456330838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post-60433758674717177002011-11-10T09:46:01.541-08:002011-11-10T09:46:01.541-08:00Hi Richard,
Thanks for this clarification. By wr...Hi Richard,<br /><br />Thanks for this clarification. By writing it up, I was mainly thinking of its benefit for developing your argument through elaboration and review. I think the idea is a great one but it needs methodological justification, etc.. Anyway, I hope to give it some attention on Corinthianmatters.dpettegrewnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post-34775950206439030792011-11-08T22:01:48.821-08:002011-11-08T22:01:48.821-08:00Thanks, dpettegrew.
I'm not sure that much is...Thanks, dpettegrew.<br /><br />I'm not sure that much is to be gained by "writing up" this work, since it is already available for free to anyone with an internet connection. You are welcome to write it up yourself.<br /><br />If 1 in every 1000 people is called "Erastus", then the probability that a person chosen at random is called "Erastus" is, of course 0.001. The probability that two people chosen at random are called Erastus is 0.001*0.001=0.000001. However, we know that we have at least one Erastus, so a more interesting question is "what is the probability that a second person, chosen at random, has the same name as the first person, whose name is Erastus?". The answer to this question is 0.001. I'm not sure whether this answers your question. If not, let me know.<br /><br />You may also like to read <a href="http://paulandco-workers.blogspot.com/2010/07/erastus-was-anonymous-brother-of-2-cor.html" rel="nofollow">this post</a>, which also discusses Erastus and identifies him as the anonymous brother of 2 Cor 12:18. This is part of a series of posts on the Titus-Timothy hypothesis, which is summarized <a href="http://paulandco-workers.blogspot.com/2010/09/summary-of-titus-timothy-hypothesis.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Richard Fellowshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06777460488456330838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post-75568322785834692442011-11-08T09:06:03.101-08:002011-11-08T09:06:03.101-08:00Great post! You should write it up.
How did you ...Great post! You should write it up.<br /><br />How did you estimate that 12,000 were from the first century? I'm also puzzled by the math. Isn't the probability of two people with the same name .001 (1/1100) x .001?dpettegrewhttp://corinthianmatters.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post-69755794571740707582010-07-03T14:39:57.260-07:002010-07-03T14:39:57.260-07:00Jonathan,
thanks for interacting again. When decid...Jonathan,<br />thanks for interacting again. When deciding whether we have two Erasti or just one, it is the absolute frequency of the name that matters. The frequency relative to other names is irrelevant, of course. However, numbers are hard to grasp, so it is perhaps instructive to compare the first century popularity of the name Erastus with that of names today. If the estimate of 1 in 1100 is correct, then Erastus was no more common than Edgar is for baby boys in the USA today.Richard Fellowshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06777460488456330838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2860023273901948907.post-50459091498855566332010-07-03T00:37:50.829-07:002010-07-03T00:37:50.829-07:00Good stuff. Thanks for posting this. I always li...Good stuff. Thanks for posting this. I always like to see actual numbers being crunched where possible. Still, it would be interesting to know how common that name was in relation to other names. Does 1/1100 make it a common name or a rare one? Its relative commoness might indicate whether or not it would be perceived as an unusual or common name. If there were two prominent Erastuses in the Christian community isn't it likely that there names would require further clarification to avoid confusion?Jonathan Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18295840754661890186noreply@blogger.com