No. The incident cannot support that conclusion. All that can be said is that it describes a historical situation which did exist in the early first century BC.
For all we know, "Paul" was a creation of Marcion in the 2d century.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/marcion.html
Oddly, 2 Corinthians is thought of as one of the "authentic" Pauline epistles, yet it contains this reference to a first century BC event.
At the time Aretas III held Damascus the Hasmonean empire created by John Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannai was tearing itself apart with dynastic quarreling. Local powers supported one claimant or another to the throne and Aretas was up to his eyebrows in just such machinations. This situation went on and on and when Pompey the Great arrived on the scene he was enticed to intervene after a suitable bribe was paid. The Romans took Damascus in 64 and Jerusalem in 63.
It was Pompey who put Hyrcanus II in charge but with only the title of high priest. Judaea was stripped of much of the territorial gains the Hasmoneans had accomplished and reduced to the status of a tributary state dependent on the newly-formed Province of Syria. This model of quasi-independence for Judaea persisted in Roman thinking whenever they could get away with it for better or worse until the bar Kochba revolt in 135 AD.
For all we know, "Paul" was a creation of Marcion in the 2d century.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/marcion.html
Quote:Marcion is often thought to have first established an explicit canon. Marcion's canon consisted of the Euangelion, or the Gospel of the Lord, and the Apostolikon, ten epistles of Paul, not including the pastorals. There is debate over whether Marcion truncated Luke and Paul or whether later orthodox scribes may have expanded them in some cases.
Oddly, 2 Corinthians is thought of as one of the "authentic" Pauline epistles, yet it contains this reference to a first century BC event.
At the time Aretas III held Damascus the Hasmonean empire created by John Hyrcanus and Alexander Jannai was tearing itself apart with dynastic quarreling. Local powers supported one claimant or another to the throne and Aretas was up to his eyebrows in just such machinations. This situation went on and on and when Pompey the Great arrived on the scene he was enticed to intervene after a suitable bribe was paid. The Romans took Damascus in 64 and Jerusalem in 63.
It was Pompey who put Hyrcanus II in charge but with only the title of high priest. Judaea was stripped of much of the territorial gains the Hasmoneans had accomplished and reduced to the status of a tributary state dependent on the newly-formed Province of Syria. This model of quasi-independence for Judaea persisted in Roman thinking whenever they could get away with it for better or worse until the bar Kochba revolt in 135 AD.
