Aretas V

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 9003
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Aretas V

Post by Giuseppe »


Hagera. The latter also had a son, also called Aretas, grandson of Aretas IV

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuldu
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1211
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Aretas V

Post by Jax »

Where exactly do you get Aretas V out of that?
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 9003
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Aretas V

Post by Giuseppe »


On 2 Cor 11:32, reference to Aretas, Nabatean king in control of Damascus, fourteen years prior to time of writing, I will argue that is a possible reference to an Aretas V, 69-70 CE (not previously known).

(source)
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1211
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Aretas V

Post by Jax »

No. It's a reference to the ethnarc of a king Aretas.
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 9003
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Aretas V

Post by Giuseppe »

Aretas IV or Aretas V?
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3935
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Aretas V

Post by Bernard Muller »

Aretas V never became king.

Cordially, Bernard
User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 9003
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Aretas V

Post by Giuseppe »

Greg Doudna addressed the following questions to Richard Carrier, but there was no answer by the latter:


Richard Carrier, thanks for your analysis. When you write (in comment above), "The Gospels are the only definite source for a historical Jesus we have (everything else either derives from them or is too ambiguous to determine the question)", have you considered and excluded the possibility that Jesus ben Sapphat active in the 60s ce of Josephus became understood to be Jesus Christ? If that were so, then there would be contemporary source material on the historical Jesus not derivative from the Gospels.

Obviously if the chronological framing of the Gospels/Acts for Jesus is unquestioned, then the Gospels/Acts' Jesus could not have derived from Jesus ben Sapphat. But if the chronological framing of the Gospels/Acts is not assumed as a prior starting-point or premise for the question of the earthly existence of the Jesus believed to be Christ; and if per argument the letters of Paul are dated ca. 70-100 ce (with the exception of reading Aretas of 2 Cor 11 as Aretas IV, does anything internal to those letters indicate pre-70 composition or pre-70 activity of Paul believed to have written some of them, at the time of those letters? [and as for Aretas, why not an Aretas V 69-70?]); Revelation is 90s reflecting source visions from ca. 70; and gospels/Acts 2nd ce ... could it be source material for the historical Jesus unaffected by Christian portrayal has been in open view all this time, but unrecognized based upon uncritical assumption of late and actually questionable chronological-structuring portrayals of Gospels/Acts?

I suppose a first question would be: is there evidence that meets historians' criteria that Christian belief in Jesus existed predating 70? Can that be established as a fact by historians' standards?

Then a second question might be: is it plausible, or can it be excluded, that under the right circumstances a figure could immediately, following a death or disappearance of that figure, come to be regarded as divine in heaven and a source of channeled visions of seers (as opposed to assumptions that that process takes some time to develop)?

Suggested answers to these two questions, respectively: no, and plausible. But what would you assess, if you care to say or comment?

maryhelena
Posts: 1868
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Aretas V

Post by maryhelena »

Giuseppe wrote: Wed Jan 20, 2021 5:29 am
Hagera. The latter also had a son, also called Aretas, grandson of Aretas IV

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuldu
Methinks you have quite a job on your hands re finding a historical Aretas V as ruler in the Nabataean Kingdom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nabataean_kings

https://en.numista.com/catalogue/nabata ... dom-1.html

The reference to your above quote from Wikipedia makes reference to a book: Jane Taylor (2001). Petra: And the Lost Kingdom of the Nabataeans.

A review of her book: Norman C. Rothman


Jane Taylor, Petra and the Lost City of the Nabataeans
Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2002

Reviewed by Norman C. Rothman


In recent years, there have been attempts to uncover Nabataean history at Petra and other
Nabataean cities. This book is one attempt. The author does not claim to be a scholar in
ancient or classical history. Rather she is a professional photographer. As a result, this
work is a prime example of a ‘coffee table book.’

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/vie ... ontext=ccr


User avatar
Giuseppe
Posts: 9003
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Aretas V

Post by Giuseppe »

Greg Doudna knows what he says.

In your place, I would not bet against him so easily. :popcorn:
maryhelena
Posts: 1868
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 11:22 pm
Location: England

Re: Aretas V

Post by maryhelena »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri Mar 12, 2021 12:56 am Greg Doudna knows what he says.

In your place, I would not bet against him so easily. :popcorn:
I'm sure Greg knows what he says.....his problem is: can he establish historicity of Aretas V as ruler in the Nabataean Kingdom around 69/70 c.e.

Greg Doudna:

On 2 Cor 11:32, reference to Aretas, Nabatean king in control of Damascus, fourteen years prior to time of writing, I will argue that is a possible reference to an Aretas V, 69-70 CE (not previously known).

(source)
Post Reply