I haven't made that connection yet, so I'm not really sure.
The last I can recall of Silvanus/Silas (of corinthians and thessalonians)and later in acts is w/ Timothy and Paul in Corinth at Acts 18|5.
In Philippi Paul and Silas, who were both Roman citizens, got flogged. After the beating he informed the authorities he and Silas were Roman citizens. They were promptly released as the authorities honored the protection of Roman citizens against such punishment, and were probably bewildered as to why Paul hadn't informed them earlier. Likely Paul was making as show for the local christians.
In Jerusalem Paul was specifically targeted by the Zealots. I make the association with Paul as the "spouter of lies." In this case Paul insisted on his rights as a Roman citizen. I think this gives it away. Thus I make my case that *if* your identification of Paul is correct by this time Paul was already disinvested by the family (not permanently, apparently, as his use to them was not immediately apparent- who knew it would catch on?) Gone too was the direct Herodian control of the Temple- and that Ananias (likely the holder of the wicked priest title)-whom Paul was clearly surprised to see holding the office of high priest in his meeting with the Sanhedrin- was the first non-Herodian to hold the office. Not to read too much, but your identification sounds alot more like simon zealotes than silas. Paul is not my specialty, though, so my mind is still open. Personally, I can't stand him, so I don't study him as closely as I should.
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.