ChristMyth

Paul writes in one of his letters that after he was converted on the road to Damascus, that he traveled to Arabia, spent three years, went back to Damascus, and then to Jerusalem to meet Peter and James.

My question is: Why Arabia? Is there any teaching going on in Arabia that could have influenced his latter writings? Is there any answer to this?

Thanks

Christmyth

Laura D.

Paul may have visited the Nabataean state (as the Jewish people viewed Arabia during the relevant period). Take a look at Wikipedia's Paul of Tarsus Entry. Josephus wrote a bit about the Nabataean State and its leaders. Take a look at at his Antiquities and the Jewish War. A Roman trade route ran from the Mediterranean into Petra. The Nabataeans spoke an Arabic dialect, but used the Aramaic script. Aramaic was the learning and trade language, but some of the early inscriptions of proper names and expressions (such a ghayr ... other than) show an Arabic vernacular.

The Nabataen State extended to Damascus. The only literary remains that I know of from the Nabataean State are inscriptions and graffiti in the Sinai and Trans-Jordan. Plus, they found scrolls in the caves south of En Gedi written in Greek, Aramaic, and Nabataean. These scrolls included biblical fragments, psalms, various legal documents, and a lost Greek translation of the minor prophets. These scrolls might date to the 1st Century CE (but that is more guess than anything on my part, it's just my impression that most of the scrolls found in that area date from the 1st Century CE).

I'm sure others can be more detailed about exactly what teaching was going on and where specifically Paul may have visited.

God bless,


Laura

aa5874

Arabia! That's strange. In the book called Acts, Saul/Paul was converted on the road to Damascus, recovered from blindness and was baptized and started to preach the Gospel in Damascus with certain disciples.

The Jews then tried to kill Saul/Paul and he escaped and fled to Jerusalem with the help of the disciples. Saul/Paul even tried to join with the disciples but they were afraid of him.

In any event, Paul was in and out of Jerusalem, preaching the word of God. See Acts 9 for Saul's version.

The Arabian journey may have been a late interpolation, but I hear that the book called Acts is basically a fairy tale.

ChristMyth

Not according to Galatians 1

Thanks for the info, Laura. I was curious about this.

aa5874

You have just un-earthed another Paul. Now, which one is the fraud, the one in Acts or the one in Galations, or both?

Ben C Smith

N. T. Wright has an interesting article on Paul, Arabia, and Elijah (in .pdf). I do not know whether to agree or to disagree, but it is a good article.

In some respects, the Arabia debate comes down to why we imagine Paul went to Arabia. Did he go there to minister in some capacity? Or did he go there to be alone and commune with God in some way? Wright basically argues for a form of the latter.

Ben.

spin

This was for a very brief period before the arrival of Pompey in Damascus, when it became part of the newly founded Roman province of Syria. After that period the Nabataean state shrank back to south of Perea. The area south of Damascus including Gamalitis was the territory of Philip. Phasaelis daughter of Aretas IV and deposed wife Herod Antipas fled south across the border from Machaerus on the other side of the Dead Sea to Nabataean land.


spin

Laura D.

Thank you Spin for the clarification.

I had understood that in 64 BC, Pompey and the Romans annexed the western part of Syria. But that in the year 37, the Roman Emperor Caligula transferred Damascus into Nabataean control by decree and that then the Nabataean king Aretas IV Philopatris ruled Damascus from his capital Petra. But that around the year 106, Nabataea was conquered by the Romans, and Damascus returned to Roman control.

Yet another instance of Wikipedia being mistaken.

God bless,


Laura

spin

Check AJ 14.2.3.


Having waltzed so often on the status of Damascus after the war between Aretas and Herod Antipas (late 36 CE), I know most of the sources on the subject. Here's a challenge: find a single ancient contemporary or near contemporary source for the claim that "Caligula transferred Damascus into Nabataean control". (You don't really need to check Suetonius, Tacitus or Josephus as they don't refer to it.)

Sad, isn't it?


spin

jakejonesiv

Hi Ben,

NT Wright does a good job in that article, but he doesn't take it quite far enough.

Paul and Elijah both set out to purge the enemies of the "true" faith, the prophets of Baal for Elijah (1 Kings 18) and the church for Paul (Gal 1:13,23).

Elijah is turned aside (1 Kings 19:3) as is Paul.

Now here is the key part; Elijah immediately goes to Horeb, the mountain of God (1 Kings 19:8). Likewise,Paul turns aside into Arabia (Gal 1:17), where Mount Sinai is supposed to be located * (Gal 4:25). It is on the Mount that Paul would naturally receive his alleged divine revelation, Gal. 1:11-12.

After that, both Elijah (1 Kings 19:15) and Paul (Gal. 1:17) go to Damascus.

Thus, according to the book of Galatians, Paul spent three years on Mount Sinai/Horeb (in Median according to Exodus 3:1, present day Saudi Arabia, "Hagar country") receiving the revelation of Jesus Christ. Here he learned the mysteries "hidden from the foundation of
the world."

The deeds of the historical Paul, like Jesus, vanish away when scrutinized. They turn out to be nothing more than recast OT tales.

Jake Jones IV

* Note: (The Holy Mountain is called "Horeb" according to E and "Sinai" according to J.)