Talk:Aretas IV Philopatris

message: The article reads,
:Because the Jews of Damascus are mentioned as lying in wait for Paul, it is very probable that Aretas made the attempt to capture Paul at the request of the Jews. From this it follows that the Jews must have been influential in the Nabataean kingdom; otherwise the Nabataeans would have been careful to avoid any interference with Paul, who was a Roman citizen.
The inference is not so simple, because according to Robert H. Gundry's A Survey of the New Testament (2nd edition, 1970), one of the possible reasons why Paul did not appeal more to his Roman citizenship was that proving such a citizenship was complicated. Claiming to be a citizen without proof would award the death penalty; and the proof process would imply the presence of witnesses and documents which Paul would not carry with him. So the only time Paul claims his citizenship was at a time when he was arrested in Caesarea (seat of Roman power in Palestine), and he knew the Jewish leaders were about to have him transported back to Jerusalem only to ambush and kill Paul on the way (see book of Acts.) So, Paul only appeals to his citizenship when he knows he will die the next day unless he reveals himself as a Roman citizen. Even so, his revelation of citizenship and subsequent appeal to Caesar earned him almost two years of imprisonment in Caesarea, a perilous winter sea voyage complete with shipwreck, and at least three years' house arrest in Rome. – Tintazul msg 15:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paul's citizenship 

message: This speculation is based on an uncritical reading of the Biblical text in 1906 that pre-dated much of the modern Biblical higher criticism of the New Testament. There are serious questions about the authorship of Acts and exact contents of the various Pauline Epistles, particularly in regard to the theological disputes between Early Christians and normative Judaism.
Anyway, what has this got at all to do with an article about the historical Nabatean King Aretas IV? The Nabateans produced remarkable monuments, monopolized the spice trade between Southern Arabia and the Mediterranean, and developed a sophisticated system of water-harvesting to support desert agriculture. Is Aretas IV's sole claim to fame his possible relationship to the Apostle Paul and the Jews of Damascus? Let's leave this highly speculative discussion to the articles about Paul and Early Christianity and New Testament textual source criticism.
 • Archæogenetics  TALK  01:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The emperor was Tiberius. On the news of his death Vitellius returned to Syria and Aretas lived another three years. -- spin|control 03:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed the above paragraph that speculates about Jewish motivations 

message: Wasn't this the king that built the Khazneh and whose family was buried in the tombs discovered underneath it? -- œ™ 11:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: No mention of Petra?

message: Please stop these foolish, intellectually dishonest "CE/BCE" euphemisms and return to AD/BC nomenclature: It's obvious that "CE/BCE" uses Dionysius's dating from the time of Christ. If you want to reject this dating system, then actually do so by picking a different dating point. To use CE/BCE, i.e. to date from the time of Christ yet refuse to mention Him, is dishonest, and dishonesty has no place in any serious encyclopedia. Not only is this "Common Era"/"Before Common Era" nomenclature dishonest, it is obviously false (at least without eschatological reference to the Incarnation): The world did not share a 'common era' until the advent of the world-wide web, or perhaps World War I. Thus, the CE/BCE nomenclature degrades the quality of Wikipedia through its foolishness, dishonesty, falseness, and absurdity. Please stop using it. -- Newagelink (talk) 00:40, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eras: Proposal to use BC/AD 

message: Should this article be updated to reflect information recorded over at Damascus#Greco-Roman_period? "It is speculated that control of Damascus was gained by Aretas IV Philopatris of Nabatea between the death of Herod Philip in 33/34 AD and the death of Aretas in 40 AD but there is substantial evidence against Aretas controlling the city before 37 AD and many reasons why it could not have been a gift from Caligula between 37 and 40 AD. In fact, all these theories stem not from any actual evidence outside the New Testament but rather "a certain understanding of 2 Corinthians 11:32" and in reality "neither from archaeological evidence, secular-historical sources, nor New Testament texts can Nabatean sovereignty over Damascus in the first century AD be proven."" --StephanNaro (talk) 14:52, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Aretas really control Damascus at the time "Paul" claimed?