RE: Did Jesus Christ exist as a historical human or was he a theological construct?
May 18, 2010 at 10:47 am
There are big problems with the whole "Paul" scenario, too. There is little in the way of historical markers in Paul but here 1 Corinthians 11 32-33
Damascus was ruled by King Aretas III of Nabatea in the time period of 84-64 BC. The political situation in Judaea in the beginning of the ist century BC was one of constant turmoil with various claimants to the throne jockeying for position. Even the arrival of Pompey the Great and his legions in 64 did not stop the turmoil but it did establish Roman rule over Damascus for the next few centuries.
Xtians attempt to create their own reality by assigning Damascus to Aretas IV who died in 40 AD but this is silly for a number of reasons.
1. It is asserted that Damascus was "given" to Aretas IV by Caligula in some sort of "settlement" of the east. Yet, all that Caligula did was remove Herod Antipas as king of Galilee and Perea and assign those territories, along with Judaea, to Herod Agrippa, his boyhood friend.
2. Anyone who ever looked at a map will see that Damascus is far to the north of Nabatea. There would be no way that Aretas IV could govern the region as he would be separated by Roman territory. It would be like the US giving Mexico back the state of Utah and then saying, "good luck getting there because we're keeping Arizona and New Mexico!"
3. Josephus reports that in the aftermath of the attack by Jewish rebels on Cestius Gallus' legion in 66 the citizens of Damascus rose up and massacred the Jews living there. Certainly seems as if the good citizens of Damascus considered themselves "Romans."
4. No Greco-Roman writer gives the slightest hint that the city was conveyed to another power.
5. Josephus recounts that Aretas IV was actually an enemy of Rome c 35/36 AD. He attacked Antipas kingdom and ended up fleeing from the army of the Roman Governor of Syria, Lucius Vitellius on the direct orders of Tiberius. The only thing that saved him was Tiberius' death in 37 which Vitellius decided canceled his mission.
6. Damascus was the western terminus of the silk road. It was, arguably, the most important overland commercial spot in the empire. The Romans did not become a great empire by giving away such lucrative pieces of real estate.
So, if "Paul" (or whoever) was writing about a first century BC political reality in one of his so-called authentic epistles, what does this say about JC? Note that none of this considers other problems with "Paul" in the first century AD such as the whole issue of Corinth itself.
Quote:32
At Damascus, the governor under King Aretas guarded the city of Damascus, in order to seize me,
33
but I was lowered in a basket through a window in the wall and escaped his hands.
Damascus was ruled by King Aretas III of Nabatea in the time period of 84-64 BC. The political situation in Judaea in the beginning of the ist century BC was one of constant turmoil with various claimants to the throne jockeying for position. Even the arrival of Pompey the Great and his legions in 64 did not stop the turmoil but it did establish Roman rule over Damascus for the next few centuries.
Xtians attempt to create their own reality by assigning Damascus to Aretas IV who died in 40 AD but this is silly for a number of reasons.
1. It is asserted that Damascus was "given" to Aretas IV by Caligula in some sort of "settlement" of the east. Yet, all that Caligula did was remove Herod Antipas as king of Galilee and Perea and assign those territories, along with Judaea, to Herod Agrippa, his boyhood friend.
2. Anyone who ever looked at a map will see that Damascus is far to the north of Nabatea. There would be no way that Aretas IV could govern the region as he would be separated by Roman territory. It would be like the US giving Mexico back the state of Utah and then saying, "good luck getting there because we're keeping Arizona and New Mexico!"
3. Josephus reports that in the aftermath of the attack by Jewish rebels on Cestius Gallus' legion in 66 the citizens of Damascus rose up and massacred the Jews living there. Certainly seems as if the good citizens of Damascus considered themselves "Romans."
4. No Greco-Roman writer gives the slightest hint that the city was conveyed to another power.
5. Josephus recounts that Aretas IV was actually an enemy of Rome c 35/36 AD. He attacked Antipas kingdom and ended up fleeing from the army of the Roman Governor of Syria, Lucius Vitellius on the direct orders of Tiberius. The only thing that saved him was Tiberius' death in 37 which Vitellius decided canceled his mission.
6. Damascus was the western terminus of the silk road. It was, arguably, the most important overland commercial spot in the empire. The Romans did not become a great empire by giving away such lucrative pieces of real estate.
So, if "Paul" (or whoever) was writing about a first century BC political reality in one of his so-called authentic epistles, what does this say about JC? Note that none of this considers other problems with "Paul" in the first century AD such as the whole issue of Corinth itself.
