Mark's Geography-Jesus' trip to and from the Tyre-Sidon Reg.
Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:05 am
On the surface, it would appear Dr. Kornform (Jackal, and critics alike) is correct and Mark did not know the area. However, when we take a close look at the Scriptures, a 3D topographical map, a map of the trade routes during the time of Christ, and examine the area under consideration, then Kornform' (Jackal, and the critic's)objection is seen to be completely without merit.
First, both Mark 7:24-31 and Matthew 15:21-28 tell essentially the same story. The space both devote is about the same, with Mark's version only a few words shorter. Nowhere is there any conflict between the two evangelists.
Second, Mark nowhere states as Kornform (Jackal, and the critic) "alleges" that Jesus went to Tyre and then Sidon to the North and then back to Tyre and then Sidon. Dr. Kornform (and Jackal) is being disingenuous and hoping that no one will carefully examine the text and route. Mark states Jesus went to the REGION that included both cities. Matthew likewise agrees with Mark, "Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the REGION of Tyre and Sidon." Matt 15:21 (NKJ) Tyre is 20 miles to the south of Sidon, and so the REGION is not very large. That Jesus went to and from the REGION, but did not necessarily enter Tyre itself, both Mark and Matthew agree. Clearly, Dr. Kornform (Jackal, and the critic)is wrong.
Third, regarding the return trip, Mark says Jesus departed from the REGION of Tyre and Sidon through Sidon. Matthew simply states Jesus departed to the area of the Sea of Galilee. The question remains as to why Jesus went through Sidon and then to Decapolis.
That the distance between two points on a map is not always the shortest or best route is the main reason armies use topographical maps for land navigation. Normally it is far easier to walk through a valley than to go over mountains. Looking at the topographical map above, we see the Bekka Valley's entrance at Sidon running through Galilee and the Decapolis all the way to the Red Sea. Walking directly to and from Tyre would involve traversing a steep mountainous region known as the Ladders of Tyre, which helped protect the city, since it was difficult for an army to access the area except from the direction of Sidon. It should now be obvious to all that Jesus took the best route, with the only question remaining as to why he went through Decapolis. Editor's note, see Trade Route map which shows the routes during the time of Christ.
Fourth, Dr. Kornform (perhaps Jackal and the critic alike)stated it was Jesus’ intention to go from Tyre to Galilee, nowhere do we find that in the text. In fact, both Mark and Matthew agree on this point. In Mark we read, "Then Jesus left the vicinity of Tyre and went through Sidon, down to the Sea of Galilee and into the region of the Decapolis," Mark 7:31 (NIV) and in Matthew, "And Jesus departed from thence, and came nigh unto the sea of Galilee; and went up into a mountain, and sat down there." Matthew 15:29 (KJV) After Jesus left Sidon and walked south through the Bekka Valley, he came to the Sea of Galilee. At that point he could turn either to the West and go through Galilee, or east and go through the Decapolis. Galilee sits on the West side of the Sea of Galilee, whereas the Decapolis sits on the East and Southern shores of the sea. Matthew states Jesus went up on a mountain or as the KJV reads a hill. Clearly, this would be what today we know to be the Golan Heights on the Eastern shore. Later, in Mark 8:10, we read that Jesus got in a boat and went to the region of Dalmanutha, which is on the East shore of the Sea of Galilee and in Galilee itself.
Two evangelists and geography confirm that Jesus likely took the route through the Bekka Valley to the regions of Tyre and Sidon. Clearly, Jesus’ trip is accurately reported in the Scriptures, and Dr. Kornfrom is blatantly wrong on all points.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Gary
For the whole discussion between Dr. Gary Butner and a hyper skeptic about Mark's Geography, see here http://www.errantskeptics.org/Marks_Geo ... Mark_7.htm
First, both Mark 7:24-31 and Matthew 15:21-28 tell essentially the same story. The space both devote is about the same, with Mark's version only a few words shorter. Nowhere is there any conflict between the two evangelists.
Second, Mark nowhere states as Kornform (Jackal, and the critic) "alleges" that Jesus went to Tyre and then Sidon to the North and then back to Tyre and then Sidon. Dr. Kornform (and Jackal) is being disingenuous and hoping that no one will carefully examine the text and route. Mark states Jesus went to the REGION that included both cities. Matthew likewise agrees with Mark, "Then Jesus went out from there and departed to the REGION of Tyre and Sidon." Matt 15:21 (NKJ) Tyre is 20 miles to the south of Sidon, and so the REGION is not very large. That Jesus went to and from the REGION, but did not necessarily enter Tyre itself, both Mark and Matthew agree. Clearly, Dr. Kornform (Jackal, and the critic)is wrong.
Third, regarding the return trip, Mark says Jesus departed from the REGION of Tyre and Sidon through Sidon. Matthew simply states Jesus departed to the area of the Sea of Galilee. The question remains as to why Jesus went through Sidon and then to Decapolis.
That the distance between two points on a map is not always the shortest or best route is the main reason armies use topographical maps for land navigation. Normally it is far easier to walk through a valley than to go over mountains. Looking at the topographical map above, we see the Bekka Valley's entrance at Sidon running through Galilee and the Decapolis all the way to the Red Sea. Walking directly to and from Tyre would involve traversing a steep mountainous region known as the Ladders of Tyre, which helped protect the city, since it was difficult for an army to access the area except from the direction of Sidon. It should now be obvious to all that Jesus took the best route, with the only question remaining as to why he went through Decapolis. Editor's note, see Trade Route map which shows the routes during the time of Christ.
Fourth, Dr. Kornform (perhaps Jackal and the critic alike)stated it was Jesus’ intention to go from Tyre to Galilee, nowhere do we find that in the text. In fact, both Mark and Matthew agree on this point. In Mark we read, "Then Jesus left the vicinity of Tyre and went through Sidon, down to the Sea of Galilee and into the region of the Decapolis," Mark 7:31 (NIV) and in Matthew, "And Jesus departed from thence, and came nigh unto the sea of Galilee; and went up into a mountain, and sat down there." Matthew 15:29 (KJV) After Jesus left Sidon and walked south through the Bekka Valley, he came to the Sea of Galilee. At that point he could turn either to the West and go through Galilee, or east and go through the Decapolis. Galilee sits on the West side of the Sea of Galilee, whereas the Decapolis sits on the East and Southern shores of the sea. Matthew states Jesus went up on a mountain or as the KJV reads a hill. Clearly, this would be what today we know to be the Golan Heights on the Eastern shore. Later, in Mark 8:10, we read that Jesus got in a boat and went to the region of Dalmanutha, which is on the East shore of the Sea of Galilee and in Galilee itself.
Two evangelists and geography confirm that Jesus likely took the route through the Bekka Valley to the regions of Tyre and Sidon. Clearly, Jesus’ trip is accurately reported in the Scriptures, and Dr. Kornfrom is blatantly wrong on all points.
Grace and peace,
Dr. Gary
For the whole discussion between Dr. Gary Butner and a hyper skeptic about Mark's Geography, see here http://www.errantskeptics.org/Marks_Geo ... Mark_7.htm