Talk:Epaphroditus

Saints Low‑importance

	Saints portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SaintsWikipedia:WikiProject SaintsTemplate:WikiProject SaintsSaints articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Untitled[edit]

Umm.... all of this information sounds fishy. Virtually every word of it, except for the part about being paul's scribe for phillipians. Thanatosimii 16:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed... Thomaschina03 10:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion text moved from article to here for discussion[edit]

I've relocated text that is not well cited to here for discussion. If it can be adequately referenced and with a neutral PoV, then it should be moved back:

The assertion that Epictetus is quoted in the New Testament has been investigated and found to be unlikely. A couple of resemblances in phrasing are probably coincidence.
While serving in Caesar's palace Epaphroditus wrote "Philippians" for Paul.
Epaphroditus' aim was that the Jews become Christians, submissive subjects of the Roman Empire, and that the Romans all become Stoics.
The result was that the Jews became neither Christian nor submissive and that the Romans became Christians in a religion that had absorbed Stoicism. This Christianity gave social stability to the Empire enabling it to survive for 13 1/2 centuries after his death, marked by the fall of Constantinople in 1453.
Epaphroditus was the author of Luke and Acts.
Reference: The assertion that Epaphroditus may have been Epictetus' father is probably false. There is little historical evidence to support such a claim.

Hu Gadarn 15:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned-up page[edit]

I moved (and rewrote) the information about Nero's secretary over to Claudius Tiberius Epaphroditus. This page about the Christian missionary probably still needs some more work done to it. Singinglemon (talk) 03:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The citation given for claiming Epaphroditus was three different people is from the ‘Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology’ (1849). I contend that we have learned a bit more about this era since that 150 year-old ‘dictionary’ declared Epaphroditus was three different people. Here I would defer to a more updated analysis of materials by Robert Eisenman, this quote is from <ref>James the Brother of Jesus (1997), second edition, paperback, pages 638- 639<ref>: “In Philippians also, Paul makes use of another allusion, as remarked, right out of the Community Rule from Qumran and applies it to Epaphroditus, whom he calls his ‘brother and fellow worker’ ...[Epaphroditus] also, appears as the name of Josephus’ editor and patron. Josephus refers to ‘Epaphroditus’ as ‘the most excellent of men’ and ‘a lover of all kinds of learning... principally in the knowledge of History, [who] himself had a part in great events and many turns of fortune...’ Like Felix, a freedman of Nero, Epaphroditus was also involved in the latter’s death, helping him commit suicide, although this actually may have been an assassination. As a reward, he would appear afterwards to have been Domitian’s secretary until the latter turned on him and put him to death, supposedly for daring to kill an Emperor.” There is much more, but the sense is that this was indeed one person. I would put Robert Eisenman’s scholarship up against the 1859 Dictionary entry on this point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cla3mute (talk • contribs) 20:19, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Documentation[edit]

The entry was based entirely upon Lightfoot's 19th C. work. I added more current sources, additional information, and standardized the reference system. Lambert OP (talk) 02:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]