A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
perseusomega9
Posts: 672
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 7:19 am
Contact:

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by perseusomega9 » Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:15 pm

Did Bernard just try to hype his rep by posting testimonials to his work from random internet strangers?
The metric to judge if one is a good exegete: the way he/she deals with Barabbas.

Who disagrees with me on this precise point is by definition an idiot.
-Giuseppe

maryhelena
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by maryhelena » Sat Sep 12, 2020 12:44 am

double post..apologies
Last edited by maryhelena on Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:44 am, edited 2 times in total.
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats

maryhelena
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by maryhelena » Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:08 am

maryhelena wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 12:44 am
perseusomega9 wrote:
Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:15 pm
Did Bernard just try to hype his rep by posting testimonials to his work from random internet strangers?
Sadly, for him, he did.

Reading the gospel story into Josephus is simply putting one interpretation on top of another interpretation. As the gospel writers have written their Jesus story with illusions to OT stories - so, likewise, Josephus has written his Herodian history with illusions, reflections, of Hasmonean history.

Thomas Brodie (Beyond the Quest for the Historical Jesus) has done the spadework for how OT stories are reflected in the NT. So - what's needed now is for scholars, like Greg Doudna, and James McLaren, to concentrate on how Josephus has used Hasmonean history in his 'inspired historiography'.

Dreams and Dream Reports in the Writing of Josephus, A Traditio-Historical Analysis by Robert Karl Gnuse.

As a priest Josephus is a custodian of his people’s traditions, and by continuing that history in the Jewish War and subsequently by rewriting it in his Antiquities, he is a prophet. For Josephus prophets and historians preserve the past and predict the future, and he has picked up the mantle of creating prophetic writings. Perhaps, in his own mind he is the first since the canonical prophets to generate inspired historiography....


It is evident that the narrative of events contained in Josephus's texts should not be taken at face value. The interpretative framework as outlined indicates that to distinguish between the comments and the narration of events is not possible. It is not simply a matter of dismissing Josephus's interpretations, nor a matter of working out which version of an event is accurate. The interpretative process is more fundamental: it controls the entire choice of subject matter and, therefore, the overall picture that is being conveyed. We must now contend with the possibility that although we can make conclusions and observations regarding what Josephus narrates, what we can conclude is, in itself, the product of an interpretation. In other words, the picture being used to understand the first century CE in Judaea may not necessarily provide the reader with a 'full' or 'balanced' representation of what was happening in the territory. In effect, our major resource for examining the period is itself a constructed picture.

James S. McLaren: Turbulent Times ? Josephus and Scholarship on Judaea in the First Century CE. page 67.


Negotiating Diaspora: Jewish Strategies in the Roman Empire
edited by John M.G. Barclay

Constructing Judaean History in the Diaspora. Josephus’s Account of Judas.

James McLaren


This study shows that we can no longer assume that this Judas presented by Josephus is an historical figure who engaged in some activity in 6 CE. It is not simply a case of claiming that Josephus may have exaggerated the account of Judas’s career and its impact by adjusting a few details here and there. Rather, Josephus’s apologetic has constructed Judas, making him a vital part of the explanation of what happened in Judaea in 66-70 CE. Who he was, what he did and what he advocated, if anything at all, need to be established afresh, outside the framework provided in War and Antiquities. (108:)

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=9 ... n&f=false

The gospel Jesus story, to a certain extent, can be liked to the OT Adam and Eve story i.e. it's an origin story clouded with mythology, symbolism, theology and philosophy. Like the Adam and Eve story, the gospel story stood as an accurate account of how Christianity developed. Eventually, the Adam and Eve story had to give way to science, to an evolutionary account of how humans developed. Likewise, the gospel origin story will have to give way to history, to an account of how humans, in this case, the Hasmoneans, lived their lives within a political sphere.

Hence my interest in going after Josephus. While debating issues of NT theology, how it's ideas developed, is a worthwhile endeavour, it can't open a road forward. Debating, for example Marx, one needs to grasp the political and environmental conditions that led him to his political theories. Likewise, if early christian origins is ones goal, then grappling with Hasmonean history has to become part of that endeavour - which requires that Josephus be, as it were, put into the dock. Not to condemn but for an explanation.
===================

Of course it's not just the gospel Jesus story that needs to be re-evaluated. Thomas Brodie went after Paul.....anyone out there with fire in their belly - that's a job waiting for you.... ;)

-----------added later

James McLaren's article on Judas the Galilean is not available on academia.edu. Unfortunately, he is unable to find a copy of the article at the present time. Which means I've just paid amazon £32 for a second hand copy of the book... :eek:
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1845
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by andrewcriddle » Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:52 am

I'm arguing here for a possible position that I do not regard as probable.
However, I'll try and clarify my earlier post.

The core Gospel narrative connection between John the Baptist and Jesus is that John starts baptizing, Jesus is baptized by John, John is arrested, Jesus starts his own ministry. According to Mark Herod did not intend to kill John when he arrested him but was later manipulated into doing so. If so the death of John could occur a number of years after his arrest.

The only structural role of the death of John (as distinct from his arrest) is to introduce the idea of Jesus as John come back, which may be Markan invention (or probably better, invention by Mark's source). It is central to the Gospel narrative that John is arrested well before the death of Jesus but rather peripheral whether he is executed before or after Jesus.

Andrew Criddle

maryhelena
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by maryhelena » Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:15 am

andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:52 am
I'm arguing here for a possible position that I do not regard as probable.
However, I'll try and clarify my earlier post.

The core Gospel narrative connection between John the Baptist and Jesus is that John starts baptizing, Jesus is baptized by John, John is arrested, Jesus starts his own ministry. According to Mark Herod did not intend to kill John when he arrested him but was later manipulated into doing so. If so the death of John could occur a number of years after his arrest.

The only structural role of the death of John (as distinct from his arrest) is to introduce the idea of Jesus as John come back, which may be Markan invention (or probably better, invention by Mark's source). It is central to the Gospel narrative that John is arrested well before the death of Jesus but rather peripheral whether he is executed before or after Jesus.

Andrew Criddle
Thanks for the clarification.

I'm not so sure about that re ''rather peripheral whether he was executed before or after Jesus.''

Beheading of John the Baptist

Mark ch.6

14 King Herod heard of it, for Jesus' name had become known. Some were saying, "John the baptizer has been raised from the dead; and for this reason these powers are at work in him." 15 But others said, "It is Elijah." And others said, "It is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old." 16 But when Herod heard of it, he said, "John, whom I beheaded, has been raised."

17 For Herod himself had sent men who arrested John, bound him, and put him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, because Herod had married her. 18 For John had been telling Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." 19 And Herodias had a grudge against him, and wanted to kill him. But she could not, 20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and he protected him. When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed; and yet he liked to listen to him. 21 But an opportunity came when Herod on his birthday gave a banquet for his courtiers and officers and for the leaders of Galilee. 22 When his daughter Herodias came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his guests; and the king said to the girl, "Ask me for whatever you wish, and I will give it." 23 And he solemnly swore to her, "Whatever you ask me, I will give you, even half of my kingdom." 24 She went out and said to her mother, "What should I ask for?" She replied, "The head of John the baptizer." 25 Immediately she rushed back to the king and requested, "I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter." 26 The king was deeply grieed; yet out of regard for his oaths and for the guests, he did not want to refuse her. 27 Immediately the king sent a soldier of the guard with orders to bring John's head. He went and beheaded him in the prison, 28 brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the girl. Then the girl gave it to her mother. 29 When his disciples heard about it, they came and took his body, and laid it in a tomb.

Surely, if Herod is thinking that Jesus is 'John, whom I beheaded, has been raised'........then re the gospel of Mark, John the Baptist has been beheaded prior to the Jesus crucifixion.

Are you suggesting that this passage in Mark is an interpolation?

Nice try Andrew - but no cigar.....

Matthew ch. 14
] So John was beheaded in the prison, 11 and his head was brought on a tray and given to the girl, who took it to her mother. 12 Later, John’s disciples came for his body and buried it. Then they went and told Jesus what had happened.

13 As soon as Jesus heard the news, he left in a boat to a remote area to be alone. But the crowds heard where he was headed and followed on foot from many towns.

Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1845
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by andrewcriddle » Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:41 am

maryhelena wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:15 am
andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:52 am
I'm arguing here for a possible position that I do not regard as probable.
However, I'll try and clarify my earlier post.

The core Gospel narrative connection between John the Baptist and Jesus is that John starts baptizing, Jesus is baptized by John, John is arrested, Jesus starts his own ministry. According to Mark Herod did not intend to kill John when he arrested him but was later manipulated into doing so. If so the death of John could occur a number of years after his arrest.

The only structural role of the death of John (as distinct from his arrest) is to introduce the idea of Jesus as John come back, which may be Markan invention (or probably better, invention by Mark's source). It is central to the Gospel narrative that John is arrested well before the death of Jesus but rather peripheral whether he is executed before or after Jesus.

Andrew Criddle
Thanks for the clarification.

I'm not so sure about that re ''rather peripheral whether he was executed before or after Jesus.''

Beheading of John the Baptist

Mark ch.6

14 King Herod heard of it, for Jesus' name had become known. Some were saying, "John the baptizer has been raised from the dead; and for this reason these powers are at work in him." 15 But others said, "It is Elijah." And others said, "It is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old." 16 But when Herod heard of it, he said, "John, whom I beheaded, has been raised."

17 For Herod himself had sent men who arrested John, bound him, and put him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, because Herod had married her. 18 For John had been telling Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." 19 And Herodias had a grudge against him, and wanted to kill him. But she could not, 20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and he protected him. When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed; and yet he liked to listen to him. 21 But an opportunity came when Herod on his birthday gave a banquet for his courtiers and officers and for the leaders of Galilee. 22 When his daughter Herodias came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his guests; and the king said to the girl, "Ask me for whatever you wish, and I will give it." 23 And he solemnly swore to her, "Whatever you ask me, I will give you, even half of my kingdom." 24 She went out and said to her mother, "What should I ask for?" She replied, "The head of John the baptizer." 25 Immediately she rushed back to the king and requested, "I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter." 26 The king was deeply grieed; yet out of regard for his oaths and for the guests, he did not want to refuse her. 27 Immediately the king sent a soldier of the guard with orders to bring John's head. He went and beheaded him in the prison, 28 brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the girl. Then the girl gave it to her mother. 29 When his disciples heard about it, they came and took his body, and laid it in a tomb.

Surely, if Herod is thinking that Jesus is 'John, whom I beheaded, has been raised'........then re the gospel of Mark, John the Baptist has been beheaded prior to the Jesus crucifixion.

Are you suggesting that this passage in Mark is an interpolation?

Nice try Andrew - but no cigar.....

Matthew ch. 14
] So John was beheaded in the prison, 11 and his head was brought on a tray and given to the girl, who took it to her mother. 12 Later, John’s disciples came for his body and buried it. Then they went and told Jesus what had happened.

13 As soon as Jesus heard the news, he left in a boat to a remote area to be alone. But the crowds heard where he was headed and followed on foot from many towns.

I doubt whether the idea that Jesus was John the Baptist come back was invented by Mark but all the Gospel references to this idea appear dependent upon Mark.

It is a rather odd claim (Jesus works miracles because he is John returned) and we have no other reference implying that John worked miracles and a claim in John 10:41 that he did not.
and many people came to him. They said, "Though John never performed a sign, all that John said about this man was true."
Andrew Criddle

maryhelena
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by maryhelena » Sat Sep 12, 2020 6:35 am

andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:41 am
maryhelena wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 5:15 am
andrewcriddle wrote:
Sat Sep 12, 2020 4:52 am
I'm arguing here for a possible position that I do not regard as probable.
However, I'll try and clarify my earlier post.

The core Gospel narrative connection between John the Baptist and Jesus is that John starts baptizing, Jesus is baptized by John, John is arrested, Jesus starts his own ministry. According to Mark Herod did not intend to kill John when he arrested him but was later manipulated into doing so. If so the death of John could occur a number of years after his arrest.

The only structural role of the death of John (as distinct from his arrest) is to introduce the idea of Jesus as John come back, which may be Markan invention (or probably better, invention by Mark's source). It is central to the Gospel narrative that John is arrested well before the death of Jesus but rather peripheral whether he is executed before or after Jesus.

Andrew Criddle
Thanks for the clarification.

I'm not so sure about that re ''rather peripheral whether he was executed before or after Jesus.''

Beheading of John the Baptist

Mark ch.6

14 King Herod heard of it, for Jesus' name had become known. Some were saying, "John the baptizer has been raised from the dead; and for this reason these powers are at work in him." 15 But others said, "It is Elijah." And others said, "It is a prophet, like one of the prophets of old." 16 But when Herod heard of it, he said, "John, whom I beheaded, has been raised."

17 For Herod himself had sent men who arrested John, bound him, and put him in prison on account of Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, because Herod had married her. 18 For John had been telling Herod, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife." 19 And Herodias had a grudge against him, and wanted to kill him. But she could not, 20 for Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and he protected him. When he heard him, he was greatly perplexed; and yet he liked to listen to him. 21 But an opportunity came when Herod on his birthday gave a banquet for his courtiers and officers and for the leaders of Galilee. 22 When his daughter Herodias came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his guests; and the king said to the girl, "Ask me for whatever you wish, and I will give it." 23 And he solemnly swore to her, "Whatever you ask me, I will give you, even half of my kingdom." 24 She went out and said to her mother, "What should I ask for?" She replied, "The head of John the baptizer." 25 Immediately she rushed back to the king and requested, "I want you to give me at once the head of John the Baptist on a platter." 26 The king was deeply grieed; yet out of regard for his oaths and for the guests, he did not want to refuse her. 27 Immediately the king sent a soldier of the guard with orders to bring John's head. He went and beheaded him in the prison, 28 brought his head on a platter, and gave it to the girl. Then the girl gave it to her mother. 29 When his disciples heard about it, they came and took his body, and laid it in a tomb.

Surely, if Herod is thinking that Jesus is 'John, whom I beheaded, has been raised'........then re the gospel of Mark, John the Baptist has been beheaded prior to the Jesus crucifixion.

Are you suggesting that this passage in Mark is an interpolation?

Nice try Andrew - but no cigar.....

Matthew ch. 14
] So John was beheaded in the prison, 11 and his head was brought on a tray and given to the girl, who took it to her mother. 12 Later, John’s disciples came for his body and buried it. Then they went and told Jesus what had happened.

13 As soon as Jesus heard the news, he left in a boat to a remote area to be alone. But the crowds heard where he was headed and followed on foot from many towns.

I doubt whether the idea that Jesus was John the Baptist come back was invented by Mark but all the Gospel references to this idea appear dependent upon Mark.

It is a rather odd claim (Jesus works miracles because he is John returned) and we have no other reference implying that John worked miracles and a claim in John 10:41 that he did not.
and many people came to him. They said, "Though John never performed a sign, all that John said about this man was true."
Andrew Criddle
Yep, lots of contradictory sayings in the gospels - but that's par for the course when theology gets top billing. However, logic, re the gospel storyline, requires that the Jesus crucifixion is after the beheading of John. John, the forerunning, has done his job - no reason to keep him around. It would make no sense to keep John around after the Jesus crucifixion: ''He must increase, but I must decrease."''(John ch.3). Jesus, a failed - whatever - dead on a cross - plenty there for a surviving John the Baptist to rally his own troops, disciples, to further his own aims - back to the Jordan if needs be......

Josephus has his John the baptizer killed prior to the war with Aretas. That is the context in which Josephus places his John figure - about 36/37 c.e.

Consequently, if one seeks to read the gospel story into the writing of Josephus - a big problem arises. It's gospel theology verse the historical interpretations, viewpoints, opinions, of Josephus. Theology is well used to taking flights of fantasy - historical interpretations are subject to being challenged. Therein, lies possibilities for moving forward beyond gospel theology to historical realities.

-----------
Just a random thought....seditious Jesus dead on the cross - no need to keep the peaceable John the Baptist in prison..... ;)
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3357
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by Bernard Muller » Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:50 pm

According to Mark Herod did not intend to kill John when he arrested him but was later manipulated into doing so. If so the death of John could occur a number of years after his arrest.
But certainly not before 33/34 CE:
From http://historical-jesus.info/85.html

A) In Mark's gospel,
a long delay between Herod Antipas & Herodias marriage and the battle in 35/36 CE is implied in this following account. It is abnormally long and detailed, with some legendary items and probably drawn from John's latter followers. But, in passing, it provides a valuable piece of information:

6:19-28 "So Herodias
[Herod's new wife, presented as ambitious and scheming by Josephus]
nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him ... On his birthday Herod gave a banquet for his high officials and military commanders and the leading men of Galilee. When the daughter of Herodias
[young Salome (whose father was Herodias' previous husband), later married to Philip, the king (tetrarch) of Cesarea Philippi, who died in 33-34 CE.
Salome could not have performed a dance in front of a court of men as a married woman (to a king!) or as a royal widow. That would have been most improper, even scandalous]
came in and danced, she pleased Herod and his dinner guests. The king said to the girl/damsel, [a married woman or widow could not be called a "girl/damsel"]
... At once the girl/damsel hurried in to the king ... He [Antipas] presented it [the head of John the Baptist] to the girl/damsel, and she gave it to her mother."

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

maryhelena
Posts: 1688
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by maryhelena » Sun Sep 13, 2020 2:54 am

It seems amiss not to mention this article by Ross Kraemer in this thread (I have previously referred to it over the years...)

The point of relevance for this thread is that Ross Kraemer highlights the many problems with the Gospel account, in and off itself, apart from attempting to amalgamate the Gospel John the Baptist account with the Josephan account of John the baptizer.

Bottom line, I would suggest, is that the Gospel story, like the Josephan story, are allegories. Consequently, neither story should be read as factual. What these allegories reflect - well - whatever it is - won't be without some reflection of Hasmonean history. Otherwise, we end up on a theological merry-go-around.....

Implicating Herodias and Her Daughter
in the Death of John the Baptizer:
A (Christian) Theological Strategy?

ross s. kraemer


While both the Gospel narratives and Josephus’s account appear relatively
straightforward, there are serious, long-noted discrepancies between Josephus, on
the one hand, and the Gospels, on the other, as well as striking if subtle differences
between Mark and Matthew. Further, and less well noted, aspects of Josephus’s
narrative are egregiously and perhaps irresolvably at odds with claims he makes
elsewhere about Herod Antipas and his wife, Herodias.

Unsurprisingly, then, there is an extensive secondary literature on the death
of John, so much so that one might wonder what else remains to be said on the subject.
Understanding that the nature of the evidence does not allow us to know
with absolute certainty that this is the case, I argue in this article that the extant
accounts in Josephus and the Gospels are best regarded as separate narratives
that both cannot and should not be amalgamated
, with the conclusion that the
assignment of blame to a young dancer, commonly taken to be Salome, and her
mother, Herodias, is historically suspect and highly unlikely. While my argument
to segregate Josephus and the Gospels is unusual, numerous scholars concur that
the banquet story, and thus the role of the daughter, at least is likely to be fictitious,
but they rarely then go on to pursue in any detail the origins, motivations,
and functions of the Gospel accounts.
I, however, argue that the implication of
women in the death of John the Baptist is a “Christian” fabrication and that, in
assigning women the primary responsibility not just for the death of John but for
the particular means of his execution, namely, decapitation, the Gospel narratives
have their function, and probably also their beginning. They are, in my view, a
response to early “Christian” concerns about the vexing relationship between
John and Jesus, most particularly the unnerving possibility that Jesus might have
been John raised from the dead.

footnote: This language appears to evoke Esth 5:3 and 7:2, where the Persian king Ahasueros offers
his Jewish wife, Esther, anything she wishes, even to half his kingdom.

my bolding and colour

Ross Kramer's article is available to read for free on jstor.
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
W.B. Yeats

Bernard Muller
Posts: 3357
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: A NEW APPROACH TO AN OLD PROBLEM

Post by Bernard Muller » Sun Sep 13, 2020 10:11 am

to maryhelena,

From Visi's The Chronology of John the Baptist and the Crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth: A New Approach (all bolding are mine)
The idea that John must have died after Jesus’ execution has been advocated by Robert Eisler (1882–1949), an ingenious but eccentric scholar, whose theories cannot but seem idiosyncratic today. Relying heavily on the Slavonic version of Josephus’ Jewish War Eisler claimed that Pilate’s office in Judea began as early as 19 CE, that Jesus was acclaimed the king of the Jews in 21 CE and was crucified the same year after his army lost a battle against the Roman troops of Pontius Pilate.
Eisler’s theories were heavily criticized and generally rejected by his contemporaries: nevertheless, we shall attempt to show that his intuitions were basically correct concerning the relative chronology of Jesus’ crucifixion and John’s beheading.
I think you are on thin ice about this 19 CE.

Later, Visi provided his sequence of events according to Josephus.
sequence of events

1. John gathered many followers around himself teaching them good morals.
2. Herod Antipas feared that the mob that gathered around John would eventually initiate a rebellion. (Josephus does not indicate that Herod had anything personal against John, nor that John criticized his unorthodox marriage.)
3. So John was arrested and executed in the fortress of Machaerus.
4. Soon after a war broke out between Herod and the Nabatean king, Aretas. Herod’s army was defeated and almost completely annihilated.
5. Many Jews of Herod’s realm believed that the military disaster was a divine punishment for the execution of John the Baptist.
Here is what Josephus wrote, according to the translation that Visi used:
So she speedily reached her father and told him what Herod planned to do. Aretas made this the start of a quarrel. There was also a dispute about boundaries in the district of Gabalis. Troops were mustered on each side and they were now at war,
So Aretas started his quarrel with Antipas right before Herodias and Antipas married; then Visi assumed: soon after, Aretas & Antipas were at war and again soon after, the battle took place. And around the time of the battle, John the Baptist was arrested, sent as a prisoner to Macherus and executed soon after.
Visi figured all these events, from Aretas' daughter flight to the battle & John's execution happened within one year around 35/36 C.

But first, "they were now at war" is misleading and even incorrect. The Greek is more properly translated as:
εις πολεμον καθισταντο
there was a state of war which does not mean the armies were fighting each other yet.

And then, we have:
From Josephus' Antiquities XVIII:
A) The future Agrippa I meets Antipas & Herodias some time (years?) after they got married (6, 2). Then,
B) Agrippa sojourns in Tiberias for some undetermined time (years?) (6, 2). Then,
C) Agrippa goes to Antioch and stays with his friend Flaccus, president over Syria, (died either 33 or 35 CE) for some unspecified duration (years?) (6, 3). Then,
D) When Flaccus is still alive, Agrippa goes to Ptolemais and then Alexandria in order to raise money for himself (6, 3).
E) Agrippa arrives in Italy (at the latest in 36 CE) when Tiberius is still alive and then sojourn here (years?).

Of course, times of Agrippa' stays in Tiberias & Antioch & finally in Italy (very eventful for Agrippa) are not known (as also when after the wedding he met Antipas with Herodias), but I doubt Josephus would have mentioned these sojourns if they were short.

Anyway. that shows Antipas & Herodias were married at least two years before 36 CE, but probably more.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed

Post Reply