Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ematthew] the occasion of the demand for a sign in Matt. 16:1

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
    ... Even assuming that the Matthew s geography is as precise as you believe it is (and why do you insist on using terminology for the places named at Matt.
    Message 1 of 6 , Nov 15, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      John Lupia wrote:

      > Dear Jeffrey:
      >
      > This is a question of geography and demography. In
      > both Matt. 16:1-4 and Matt 12:38-39 Jesus is in Upper
      > Galilee. Mt 15:21-28 he is in Lebanon at Saida (Sidon)
      > and Sur (Tyre). Mt 15:29-39 Jesus travels 35 miles NE
      > from Sur (Tyre) to Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee; also
      > Lake Tiberias). Mt 15:29b places him on a mountain
      > along the Lake Kinneret rim. Where is uncertain. The
      > demographic mix would be predominantly Jewish.

      Even assuming that the Matthew's geography is as precise as you believe it is (and
      why do you insist on using terminology for the places named at Matt. 15:21 and
      15:29 that the Matthew himself doesn't use?), there is still the fact that you
      haven't taken account of -- that the mutes were *brought* to Jesus. The real
      issue is where they were brought from, not where Jesus is.

      Besides that, are there no mountains PARA THN QALASSAN THS GALILAIAS that are
      Gentile territory? And what do you make of the description in Matt. 15:38 that
      the healings take place somewhere away from and outside of the region of Magadan?
      .
      JG
      --

      Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)

      1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
      Chicago, IL 60626

      jgibson000@...
    • John Lupia
      ... First, it is what the text says. Second, you are the one who wishes to know the demography of the mutes. To ignore the geographic locale that can be
      Message 2 of 6 , Nov 16, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000@...>
        wrote:

        >
        >
        > John Lupia wrote:
        >
        > > Dear Jeffrey:
        > >
        > > This is a question of geography and demography. In
        > > both Matt. 16:1-4 and Matt 12:38-39 Jesus is in
        > Upper
        > > Galilee. Mt 15:21-28 he is in Lebanon at Saida
        > (Sidon)
        > > and Sur (Tyre). Mt 15:29-39 Jesus travels 35 miles
        > NE
        > > from Sur (Tyre) to Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee;
        > also
        > > Lake Tiberias). Mt 15:29b places him on a mountain
        > > along the Lake Kinneret rim. Where is uncertain.
        > The
        > > demographic mix would be predominantly Jewish.
        >
        > Even assuming that the Matthew's geography is as
        > precise as you believe it is


        First, it is what the text says. Second, you are the
        one who wishes to know the demography of the mutes. To
        ignore the geographic locale that can be considered in
        answering or attempting to answer the question, would,
        in my opinion, fail to be a complete investigation on
        the question and would leave you open to criticism on
        that point. Third, I was imprecise myself since I
        noticed a lapsus calami on my part when I wrote "Jesus
        travels 35 miles NE" when it should have read "Jesus
        travels 35 miles SE". Sorry for the typo. Fourth, it
        has nothing to do with what I personally believe. I
        was pointing out essential material that must be
        considered using scientific criteria.




        (and
        > why do you insist on using terminology for the
        > places named at Matt. 15:21 and
        > 15:29 that the Matthew himself doesn't use?),


        The nomenclature of the geographic places is properly
        given with both modern or contemporary names as well
        as those given by Matthew or any other antique writer
        (the ancient names) as a standard academic form as I
        was taught back in graduate biblical studies.


        there
        > is still the fact that you
        > haven't taken account of -- that the mutes were
        > *brought* to Jesus.


        This is selective on your part. You choose to not give
        credence to Matthew's geography but at the same time
        choose to completely believe "that the mutes were
        *brought* to Jesus. How do you make determinations on
        which parts of the text you selectively choose to
        believe and discard or disregard? Moreover, the lame,
        blind and mutes were among the crowd that came to
        Jesus from the geographic location on the Lake
        Kinneret rim that might be identifiable in light of Mt
        16:5,13. Since traveling to the other side of the Lake
        Kinneret rim placed them within walking distance of
        Caesarea Philippi NE it indicates that the time of the
        healing of the lame, blind and mutes he was NW in
        Upper Galilee as I said yesterday. Being NE in the
        district of Caesarea Phili put Jesus then on the
        east-west highway, an international trade route
        running from there to Sur (Tyre), Lebanon and
        Damascus, Syria. If Jesus and the crowds with the
        infirm had convened there then your inquiry regarding
        Gentile ethnicity would be further strengthened and
        legitimized. However, Mt 16:5 tells us they crossed
        over to the other side to be in that location. So,
        hence, the crux of your question becomes severely
        weakened in any attempt to identify the infirm with
        Gentile specific ethnicity. However, if you
        selectively choose to disregard Matthew's geography
        the question of demography will remain open and
        answerable exclusively by other criteria that ignores
        geography.


        The real
        > issue is where they were brought from, not where
        > Jesus is.


        This needs to be seriously reconsidered by you if you
        are to be taken seriously.

        > Besides that, are there no mountains PARA THN
        > QALASSAN THS GALILAIAS that are
        > Gentile territory? And what do you make of the
        > description in Matt. 15:38 that
        > the healings take place somewhere away from and
        > outside of the region of Magadan?

        See my above comments regarding this. Curiously, you
        selectively choose to believe this and are aware that
        Jesus, in Matthew's description, is on the west side,
        not the east. If they are away from Magadan (Magdala)
        they are obviously north or possibly south, but
        certainly, not east prohibited by Mt 16:5.

        Cheers,
        John

        =====
        John N. Lupia, III
        Toms River New Jersey 08757 USA
        Fax: (732) 349-3910
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Roman-Catholic-News/
        God Bless America



        __________________________________
        Do you Yahoo!?
        Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
        http://my.yahoo.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.