Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Couchoud had proposed the idea that Paul means "the little one", to mean that he was small in stature.

But we know about Dyonisius exiguus = “Dionysus the Little one”. Hence Paulus doesn't mean the same thing of exiguus.

The Acts hypothesis about Paul as a stupid derivation from Shaul is too much stupid to be considered seriously, just as the hypothesis of a derivation from the presumed benefactor of Paul, Sergius Paulus. Anything coming from Acts is stupid.

The precise sense in Latin of Paulus is: a small amount, a bit.

The question arises by need: a smalle amount... ...of what?

Of the divine spark, naturally!

Giuseppe wrote: ↑Thu May 23, 2019 7:14 amCouchoud had proposed the idea that Paul means "the little one", to mean that he was small in stature...

The question arises by need: a small amount... ...of what?
Of the divine spark, naturally!

Ummm...No.

You can be "small" in stature and be very tall otherwise, depending on what "Small in stature" refers.

Suetonius, 12 Caesars, "Vespasian":

"Though Licinius Mucianus, a man of notorious unchastity, presumed upon his services to treat Vespasian with scant respect, he never had the heart to criticize him except privately and then only to the extent of adding to a complaint made to a common friend, the significant words: "I at least am a man. 30..."

Note #30: "Implying that Mucianus was effeminate and unchaste."

Believe me when I tell ya': This is Paul, right here.

CW

"Paulus, -a, -um" is indeed a Latin adjective. But it is also listed in Wikipedia as a less common Roman praenomen, sometimes spelled Paullus; and also as a known Roman cognomen. He could have acquired it as a nickname because of an individual attribute, or it might have just been his given proper name.

Paul only ever uses that one name for himself. It is striking that he, supposedly a Jew, does not name his father in Philippians 3:5.

His nickname perhaps? "Shorty"?