> At 04:39 AM 8/6/2006, Jack Kilmon wrote:
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Jeff Peterson"
>>Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 7:55 PM
>>Subject: Re: [XTalk] Re: Palestine and Josephus
>> > The lexical information on the ancient use of XXX is fascinating, but
>> > I think that by focusing on it we are moving off Mark's original
>> > question (or at least what I took that question to be). The question
>> > is why modern scholars of ancient Christianity and Judaism typically
>> > use "Palestinian" as the adjective to describe people, events, and
>> > institutions in eretz Yisrael rather than "Judean" or the like. I'm
>> > guessing that the use of XXX in antiquity is only one small tributary
>> > in this stream.
>> > Jeff Peterson
>> > Austin Graduate School of Theology
>> > Austin, Texas
>>I typically use "Palestinian" or "ancient Palestine" in much the same
>>anachronistic manner that we say "ancient America" or "prehistoric
>>Modern eretz Yisrael does not include the entire region nor does ancient
>>Israel or Judah or Judea. "Palestine" encompasses the entire region
>>having to dance around the Galilee, Samaria, Judah, Israel, Judea, Perea,
>>etc. In short, it works geographically.
>>San Marcos, Texas
> Jeff's inadvertent question and Jack's response should be placed in the
> context of a thread on this subject on this list from April 20 to 24.
> "Palestine" was an intentionally tendentious term introduced by the
> which etymologically was derived from a reference to Philistine territory.
> It is NOT a neutral geographical term because of its history. Please
> consult the archives for details.
Yes, that's true, Bob, but usage and meanings change over time. "Christian"
was also an intentionally tendentious term. ANE is too broad for a neutral
term, Israel too narrow. I guess I'll have to scroll back and see how it
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.