Giuseppe wrote: ↑Fri May 28, 2021 5:30 am
The possibility that an Aretas III is meant is remote beyond any possibility. Not even Alvar Ellegaard (!) advanced a Paul contemporary of the Qumranic Teacher of Justice. To my knowledge, Paul is from 1° or 2° century. Tertium non datur.
In both the cases, an Aretas III is excluded a priori.
Given that the only two reasonable candidates are Aretas IV and Aretas V, it is too much easy to realize why the latter is probably the Aretas who is meant.
Greg Doudna on Aretas IV
Only one king Aretas is known in the first century CE and that is the Nabataean king Aretas IV, whose reign is generally dated from about 9 BCE to 40 CE. All discussions of the 2 Corinthians allusion have assumed that the reference is to Aretas IV. But there is a problem, an elephant in the room: Damascus was part of the Roman province of Syria throughout the time of Aretas IV. If 2 Corinthians 11 is set to one side, nothing in known history attests to or supports Aretas IV ever having been in control of Damascus
Aretas V = No historical evidence for Aretas V - so - speculation and an attempt to re-write Nabataean history to support an interpretation of 2 Cor. 11.32.
2 Cor 11.32
In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king guarded the city of the Damascenes...
Aretas III ruled Damascus.
Aretas III (/ˈærɪtəs/; Arabic: حارثة الثالث Ḥārthah; Greek: Αρέτας Arétās) was king of the Nabataean kingdom from 87 to 62 BCE. Aretas ascended to the throne upon the death of his brother, Obodas I, in 87 BCE. During his reign, he extended his kingdom to cover what now forms the northern area of Jordan, the south of Syria, and part of Saudi Arabia. Probably the greatest of Aretas' conquests was that of Damascus, which secured his country's place as a serious political power of its time. Nabataea reached its greatest territorial extent under Aretas' leadership.
The city was taken from the loosening grip of the Seleucid Empire in 85 BCE by Aretas, who styled himself as Aretas Philhellen (Philhellen, "friend of the Greeks"). He ordered the mints of Damascus to produce the first silver Nabataean coins,
Nabataean rule of Damascus was interrupted in 72 BCE by a successful siege led by the Armenian king Tigranes II. Armenian rule of the city ended in 69 BCE when Tigranes' forces were pulled out to deal with a Roman attack on the Armenian capital, allowing Aretas to re-take the city.
Aretas IV - no historical evidence that he ruled Damascus.
Aretas V - no historical evidence for such a Natabaean king.
Perhaps Greg Doudna would do well to re-consider what he wrote about the Josephan figure of John the baptizer.
Josephus’s John the Baptist passage of Ant. 18.117-119
is a chronologically dislocated story of the execution of Hyrcanus II by Herod the
"Is Josephus's John the Baptist Passage a Chronologically Dislocated Story of the Death of Hyrcanus II?"
https://www.academia.edu/43060817/_Is_J ... rcanus_II_
Greg has no problem with suggesting a chronological dislocated story in Josephus. Greg 's theory is that the Josephan John the baptizer figure is a dislocated story about Hyrcanus II. Hyrcanus died re Josephus around 30 b.c. (Greg suggests the date might be earlier, around 34 b.c.)
Hyrcanus was the eldest son of Alexander Jannaeus, King and High Priest, and Alexandra Salome. After the death of Alexander in 76 BCE, his widow succeeded to the rule of Judea and installed her elder son Hyrcanus as High Priest. Alexander had numerous conflicts with the Pharisees. However Hyrcanus was supported by the Pharisees, especially later in his tenure.
When Salome died in 67 BCE, she named Hyrcanus as her successor as ruler of Judea as well, but soon he and his younger brother, Aristobulus II, dissented over the right to the throne.
''''''''''''''''''''Hyrcanus feared that Aristobulus was planning his death. Such fears were furthered by Hyrcanus' adviser, Antipater the Idumean. According to Josephus, Antipater sought to control Judea by putting the weak Hyrcanus back onto the throne. Hyrcanus took refuge with Aretas III, King of the Nabataeans, who had been bribed by Antipater into supporting Hyrcanus' cause through the promise of returning Arabian towns taken by the Hasmoneans.
The Nabataeans advanced toward Jerusalem with an army of 50,000, took the city and besieged the Temple where Aristobulus had taken refuge for several months.
As for Alexander Jannaeus - well - he lost a battle against Aretas III.
Greg is happy to suggest that the Josephan figure of John the baptizer is a dislocated story about Hyrcanus II.
There we go - back to Hyrcanus II and Alexander Jannaeus - - the chronological time frame for Aretas III.
Perhaps Greg needs to have a rethink. Seems to me he was on far better ground with the Hasmoneans than he is with Natabaean history.
So - re Greg - no John the baptizer prior to the war between Aretas IV and Herod Antipas - i.e. the story is a dislocation of Hyrcanus II.
So - no Paul in Damascus in the time of Aretas III - but Hyrcanus II was there - and earlier his father, Alexander Jannaeus.
So - both stories - the Josephan story regarding John the baptizer and the NT story regarding Paul - run right back to earlier Hasmonean history.
(and no Paul is not Hyrcanus II - nor is Paul a Herodian - Paul, like the Josephan John the baptizer figure - reflects Hasmonean history. It seems it was Hasmonean Jews that sought to make a future spiritual kingdom from the ruins of their earthly kingdom. )