80 Rick Strelan with the Elamites (associated in Acts 2,9 with the Parthians and Medes). Schmiedel responded to this suggestion by saying, “Philologically this derivation is the simplest of all; but it contributes nothing towards the solution of the riddle” (47). But I propose that Dalman’s philological suggestion does, indeed, provide a clue, if not the solution. The key is found with Josephus, probably a contemporary of Luke. According to him, Elymos (“Elumo") was the son of Shem, and the ancestor of the Persians. He writes, “For Elymos left behind him the Elamites, the ancestors of the Persians” (“Elumo" men gar ∆Elumai;ou", ; ; Perswn onta" archgeta" katelipen, Ant 1.6.4). As noted earlier, the '[ j v v magoi were commonly associated with the Persians. This is significant because with this datum we now have a link between “Eluma" and mavgo" without going via the Aramaic or Arabic route. Josephus’ information also helps in understanding how Luke can say that Bar Jesus is translated or interpreted as Elymas. Elymas is the son of Shem (cf Gen 10,22; 10,31; 1 Chr 1,17). The Hebrew name Shem (µv) and the Hebrew word for the Name (µv) provide an ideal opportunity for Luke to play on them. Both names, Elymas and Bar Jesus, can be interpreted to mean ‘the son of µv’. By playing on the name of the father of Elymos (Shem) and the sacred Name (Heb µv), Luke understands Elymas to be an interpretation of (meqermhneuvetai) Bar Jesus. By this word-play, Luke is in effect wanting to say that the meaning of Bar Jesus is not ‘son of Jesus’ [= the Name], but ‘son of Shem’, the ancestor of the magoi. The son of Shem and the ancestor of the magoi = Persians is Elymos. So, logically it seems to me, Luke can say that the name Elymas is an interpretation of the name Bar Jesus. It might be argued that Luke’s Greek-speaking audience would not catch Hebrew word-plays. But there is only one Hebrew word that I am suggesting Luke is playing with, and that is the word µv (Name). It is indeed feasible to assume that Greek-speakers would know that one Hebrew word, if they knew no other. The point is that this man does not belong to the true followers of Jesus nor is he a member of the valid, authentic prophetic circle. Paul and Barnabas are the true exponents of the will and word of God, especially in the matter of righteousness. Bar Jesus, therefore, is not the son of the Name, but the son of Shem, the ancestor of the Persians and of the magoi, and so he is a magos, a foreigner to the true Christian community and an opponent of the truth. (47) SCHMIEDEL, “Barjesus”, 480.