Was Paul a "tentmaker"?

by CyrusThePersian 48 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • CyrusThePersian
    CyrusThePersian

    In Acts 18:2,3 we read:

    "There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them, and because he was a tentmaker as they were, he stayed and worked with them."

    OK, simple enough--in English that is. When we start looking at it in ancient Greek it gets a little more complex, but we'll get to that later. First though, I have to ask a logical question. If Paul, Priscilla and Aquila were tentmakers in the cosmopolitan city of Rome, and later in the equally cosmopolitan city of Corinth, who were their customers? First century camping enthusiasts perhaps? Maybe the military but one would think that they would employ their own tentmakers. Bedouin nomads used tents but not only were they 800+ km away from Corinth (and over 1000km away from Rome) they made their own tents. (I admit that they might have had a small market in merchants who might use tents as awnings in the marketplace.)

    Now let's take a look at the Greek. The passage reads in Greek:

    και δια το ο μοτεχνον ειναι ε μενεν παρ αντοις και η ργαζετο: η σαν γαρ σκηνοποιοι τη τεχνη.

    Let's look at σκηνοποιοi (pronounced SKAY-no-poi-oi), the word commonly translated as "tentmakers". This word is used only this one time in the Bible, in fact it's not known to have been used anywhere else in any ancient Greek literature, but this is not uncommon. In ancient Greek, compound words were often made up to define things. In this case the suffix ποιοi means "maker" or "craftsman". It has no other meaning. The prefix Σ κηνοσ (skenos) however can mean "tent" or "stage" as in a theatre stage. (Skenos is where we get the English theatrical terms "scene" and "scenery" by the way) Is it possible that Paul and Co. were theatrical scenery makers?

    In speaking of Christians as " fools" or "clowns" μωροι (pronounced MO-roi) for the sake of Christ (1 Cor. 1:27; 4:10; 2 Cor. 11:16-17) or of himself and the apostles as having "become a spectacle θεατρον (THE-a-tron) to the world" (1 Cor. 4:9), could Paul be drawing on first hand experience with the theatre?

    I know that the arguments set forth here are pretty weak, but then, so are the arguments that Paul was an actual tentmaker. Also, I could point out that the writer of Acts, writing in an urban setting for an urban audience, would take it as a given that his readers would think in terms of the theatre when seeing the word skenos rather than tents. It would only be later, when the theatre fell out of favor with Christianized Rome that the other meaning of skenos, that of tents and tentmaking would become more popular with Christian scholars and would be translated that way into other languages.

    Thanks for reading!

    CyrusThePersian

  • Band on the Run
    Band on the Run

    It always strikes me as odd that someone with Paul's education would make tents. He never strikes me as a common laborer. Dominic Crossan or some other scholar wrote that sometimes Paul engaged in tent making as a cover for talking about Christianity with customers. No one believes Paul went door to door like the Witness and the Mormons. Indeed, actual statistics showed there was no massive recruiting drive.

    Rather, most Christians erred on the side of living and would pass word of mouth concerning Jesus. There were no mass conversions as in old stories and films. There was slow but steady growth.

    Today it is hard to get an academic job in history unless you focus on economics and the way ordinary people lived. The Great Leader traditon has faded away. I personally feel history is a mix of economics, mostly, and humans bringing skills to certain positions. Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison drove each other crazy. A lot of history was accomodating the person. Anyway, with the focus now on laborers, this idea will probably be refined.

    My experience as an Anglican has showed me how language is transformed. There are three or four terms for everything. I prefer the King James language but almost all the words I love had a very different meaning when written than they do now.

    Paul had donors. The labor was an exception to the rule. He states so expressly on at least one occasion.

    Also, a priest pointed out that carpenters are never poor people. They are solidly middle class in the Middle East. Jesus was middle class. I imagine whatever Paul did was very skilled. I listened to an NPR show about Thoreau and Emerson. American literary and political men of letters also had four other skills. They were Renaissance in that regard. It is hard to imagine with today's culture as an example.

  • fulltimestudent
    fulltimestudent

    Thnx Cyrus,

    A 'weak argument' - umm! no weaker than many other 'christian' thoughts.

    I've wanted to do a study unit on the NT that my uni runs, and I thought I'd missed my chance, but found out last week that it may run S1 -2014, so I'll save your argument for a tutorial then

    thnx for posting it.

  • Brother of the Hawk
    Brother of the Hawk

    Thank you Cyrus. I too had conflicting feelings regarding this "Tentmaker". You see with my business/hobby background I have also made tents and wondered who was the market. Thanks again. Fulltime student: Here is a thought to consider. I am not correcting you, Please don't get me wrong, it's just that I watched a documentary regarding the life of Christ, and the point was mentioned regarding the term carpenter. At that time in history and around that area wood was very scarce. That's why the Staros/stake "always remained the more prominent part". When we use the term carpenter we automatically think on terms of wood. In those days the term carpenter also referred to a stone cutter, which makes a lot sense since most everything was made of stone. With some research one will discover even most of the drinking cups were of stone or baked clay. I do forget which stone was referred to or most commonly used. Just a tid bit to show how terms in wording have changed. Affectionately: Brother of the Hawk ( I will surrender my mind no more, forever)

  • Brother of the Hawk
    Brother of the Hawk

    Sorry fulltime student I ment Band on the run.

  • Anony Mous
    Anony Mous

    Also, according to the myth, Paul was also a Farizee of the sect of the Sadducees. He was a scholar of trade, most likely his talks were given on public stages and market places. It's doubtful he did any hard labor, most likely he lived off his family name.

  • Bobcat
    Bobcat

    The BECNT-Acts commentary (Darrell L. Bock, p. 578) adds a little insight into this:

    Paul and these two [Priscilla & Aquila] make an immediate connection because they share the same trade (techne). First Corinthians 4:12 refers to how Paul labored with his hands to earn a living (also 1 Thess. 2:9). They are tentmakers, which likely included working with leather in general, so that they can be considered leatherworkers (Michaelis, TDNT 7:393-94, speaks of primarily leatherwork, which could also include tents; Jervell 1998: 458). They are not weavers of goat hair as some suggest (correctly Schneider 1982: 249; Larkin 1995: 262-63n). There was precedent for having such a trade among rabbis (m. 'Abot 2.2). Rabbis were not to profit from the study of Torah, nor were they to sit idle.

    [End of quote]

    Material in [] is Bobcat's for clarification.

  • Bobcat
    Bobcat

    As an edition to my post above, BDAG has an interesting (and interestingly long) writeup about skenopoios (Strong's # 4635). They also mention various possibilities (tentmakers, leather workers). But the end of the writeup falls back on "maker of stage properties" as the most probable.

    Their argument mostly falls on the lines that "tentmakers" in metropolitan areas is unlikely in itself. Also, that it is unlikely that nomadic peoples would need specialists for such a basic need as tentmaking. (Imagine a hunter needing a specialist to sharpen his knives, or a archer needing a specialist for stringing his bow.)

    On the idea of theatrical property making, BDAG makes these comments:

    But if one understands skene not as 'scene' but as 'tent' and consides it improbable that Prisca, Aquila, and Paul would have practiced such a trade in the face of alleged religious objections (s. Schurer II 54-55 on Jewish attitudes towards theactrical productions), one would follow the traditional rendering [of tentmaking].

    But towards the end of the writeup, it says:

    But this and other efforts at more precise definition, such as weaver of tent-cloth (a view no longer in fashion) may transmit reflections of awareness of local practice in lieu of semantic precision. - In the absence of any use of the term skenopoios, beyond the pass[ive] in Pollux and the Herm. Wr., and the lack of specific qualifiers in the text of Ac 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 skenopoios in ref[erence] to matters theatrical. In addition, Ac 20:34; 1 Cor 4:12; 1 Th 2:9; 2 Th 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.

    Michaelis in TDNT definitely prefers 'leather-worker' (a major part of tent-making) and sees no problem with the idea of such work in metropolitan areas. He offers the possibility that Aquila had shops in several cities (including Rome, where he and his wife were probably expelled with the Jews in 49 AD.)

    It would seem that the specific meaning is open to several possible lines of reasoning, each of which has its own logic.

  • Julia Orwell
    Julia Orwell

    Paul also makes a lot of allusions to Greek myths so he was also versed in Greek religion and mythology.

  • HowTheBibleWasInvented
    HowTheBibleWasInvented

    Paul never said in his letters he was a tentmaker. He does say however he laboured. What that means is anyones guess. The writer of Acts wrote probably 50-70 years after Pauls death.

    Paul seemed highly educated in his letters. He begs for money from his churches often. Was he a tentmaker...Is the tradition is Acts authentic? I give 50-50% and lean towards no.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit