GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Wed Aug 18, 2021 1:51 pm
maryhelena wrote: ↑Wed Aug 18, 2021 6:48 amSo - partial control of Damascus is what Aretas IV had ? And the evidence is ???
Not evidence as such,
'' but wouldn't we expect there to have been a Nabataean community within Damascus? An "ethnarch" is literally a leader of an ethnic community, though whether Paul was using that term in that way can't be determined by context. Still, we know that communities had their own sets of leaders within the ancient world. Philo writes about "the council of [Jewish] elders" that looked after the Jewish community in Alexandria in Flaccus. They had ties to Herod Agrippa and other Jewish communities as well. And Paul was sent by Jewish authorities to persecute the church of God. If he did that within Jewish communities outside of Judea like in Damascus, then that might be an equivalent also. It's not like when Rome conquered communities those communities suddenly thought "well, that's it, I guess we're Romans now." People defined themselves by traditions and culture rather than by leaders, much as they still do now.''
spin here
AJ 14:116-118
....and it hath come to pass that Egypt and Cyrene, as having the same governors, and a great number of other nations, imitate their way of living, and maintain great bodies of these Jews in a peculiar manner, and grow up to greater prosperity with them, and make use of the same laws with that nation also. Accordingly, the Jews have places assigned them in Egypt, wherein they inhabit, besides what is peculiarly allotted to this nation at Alexandria, which is a large part of that city. There is also an ethnarch allowed them, who governs the nation, and distributes justice to them, and takes care of their contracts, and of the laws to them belonging, as if he were the ruler of a free republic. In Egypt, therefore, this nation is powerful, because the Jews were originally Egyptians, and because the land wherein they inhabit, since they went thence, is near to Egypt. They also removed into Cyrene, because that this land adjoined to the government of Egypt, as well as does Judea, or rather was formerly under the same government.''
This makes a case for the separatist nature of the Jews in the lands of Egypt and Cyrene and it is on account of this that the Jews were given a "governor" (ethnarch, according to Josephus). There is no reason to think that such a position, if it were indeed called an "ethnarch", was anything other than a special concession for the Jews in Egypt and Cyrene. The position was the status quo before Augustus set up a 38-member council in place of previous arrangements.
Philo: In Flaccum, 74
[Flaccus] arrested thirty-eight members of our council of elders, which was appointed to manage Jewish affairs after the death of the genarch by the saviour and benefactor, Augustus.''
spin:
here
First, the report of Josephus concerning these extraordinary ethnarchs in AJ 19.283 does not agree with what Philo says, In Flacc. 74, that a council of elders was appointed by Augustus to manage Jewish affairs after the death of the genarch. It would seem that Josephus got it wrong. Second, the report of this "ethnarch" deals specifically with the Jews and can in no way be associated appointments by Aretas IV present in Damascus. Third, the Jews were inside the Roman empire, while the Nabataeans were not and had no political existence inside the empire, especially in the few years between the war with Herod Antipas and the death of Aretas. It is therefore certainly not very plausible that Aretas had an official agent of any sort in or around Roman controlled Damascus, let alone one between 37 and 40 CE.
I don't think it is outlandish to think that a king in a neighbouring kingdom, who had ruled for 40 years (assuming standard timelines), might have influence and indeed some partial control(!) of a community of Nabataeans within a city like Damascus. Not evidence, I agree, but also not far-fetched. This is where a Bayesian approach might be useful, weighing up Paul's references to Caesar, Corinth, Philippi vs Aretas.
Partial control - no evidence.
The conversation might have gone this way:
"King Aretas, Paul is in Damascus stirring things up!"
"Isn't there a community of Nabataeans in Damascus?"
"Yes, sire!"
"Release the Ethnarch!"
Nice try but no cigar.....
Maryhelena, how do you account for Paul's reference to Corinth? It didn't exist when Aretas III lived. It did exist when Aretas IV lived. Do you have any suggestions with regards to how Paul could refer to Corinth if he lived in the time of Aretas III? I don't mind speculation btw, as long as it is clearly marked.
Ancient Corinth
The Romans demolished Corinth in 146 BC, built a new city in its place in 44 BC, and later made it the provincial capital of Greece.
OK - what age would Paul be when he was escaping from Aretas III ? Last date for the escape would be just prior to Aretas III losing control of Damascus - around 64/63 b.c. Maybe Paul was aged somewhere between 20 and 30 years - placing his birth somewhere between 94 and 84 b.c. That would make Paul somewhere between 39 and 49 years old when Corinth was rebuilt in 44 b.c. Speculation really as we don't know Paul's age .....
Anyway, speculation aside - I don't view the NT figure of Paul as being a historical figure. Paul is the paper apostle.
maryhelena
here
By all means reject a historical Paul in Damascus under Aretas III in the years 85 to 72 b.c. and 69 to 64/63 b.c.. (I do so myself as I view the NT Paul figure as a paper apostle.) But that rejection does not allow you to assume that Aretas IV had control of Damascus in the lst century c.e.. i.e. the standard NT timeline - there being no historical evidence to support Aretas IV controlling Damascus.
Consequently, you have no valid reason to support a theory regarding Paul in Corinth during the standard NT timeline. Have Paul in Corinth by all means but the timeline for that could be any dating up to most probably early 2nd century. 2 Cor.11.32 is the only historical time marker within 2 Cor.11. If your theory rests upon a historical Paul in Corinth within the standard NT timeframe - then I'm afraid your historical Paul has flown the nest ...welcome, of course, by some people.
Bottom line - Aretas IV had no control of Damascus during the NT standard timeline. Thus, no way to date Paul - and no way to date Paul in Corinth.
(I'm interested in the historical dates/events that can be found in the NT - that way a timeline relevant to the NT story can be developed - a historical timeline which does, of course, stretch out the standard model NT timeline - which is, in effect, a condensed version of the early Jewish roots of Christianity.)