|
|
|
| Hyper-Skeptic Questions
Mark's Geography This debate between Kornform and Dr. Gary Butner took place in July 1999. You will find what appears to be repetition, but keep reading and you will see this hyper-skeptic attempts to confuse the readers and bury his mistakes. Scripture is always shown in white for clarity. Kornform's objection:Gee, why would "Mark's"
simple itinerary list the order of travel for Jesus as Tyre, THEN Sidon to the
north, THEN back south to Tyre again, THEN to the Decapolis to the SOUTH of
Galilee, THEN finally to Galilee when the intention of the trip was just to go
to Galilee from Tyre? That's like wanting to go to St Louis from NYC via
Montreal and then New Orleans.
Mark writes:"From there He arose and went to the REGION of Tyre and Sidon." Mark 7:24. NKJ And "Again He went out from the REGION of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis." Mark 7:31 (NASB 1995 Update)
Dr Gary's response:On the surface, it would appear Dr. Kornform 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'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 "alleges" that Jesus went to Tyre and then Sidon to the North and then back to Tyre and then Sidon. Dr. Kornform 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 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 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, Kornform response:Gary<< Mark writes: From there He arose and went to the REGION of Tyre and Sidon. Mark 7:24. NKJ >> And Again He went out from the REGION of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis. Mark 7:31 (NASB 1995 Update) >> Gary<<My response: On the surface, it would appear Dr. Kornform is correct and Mark did not know the area. However, when we take a closer look at the Scriptures, examine a 3D topographical map of the area, and the area under consideration, then Kornform's objection is seen to be completely without merit. First, both Mark 7:24-30 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.>> Kornform: Yes there certainly is. Using the NAS Mark (No-Last-Name) says Jesus went to Tyre, then went north to Sidon then to the Sea of Galilee and then to the Decapolis. Matthew, copying Mark, knew he had made a mistake and simply fudged a correction. Mark says Jesus went to Tyre and Matthew says the "region" of Tyre and Sidon. Mark says left Tyre to go to Sidon and Matthew eliminates the mistake. Mark 7:24 And from there He arose and went away to the region of Tyre. And when He had entered a house, He wanted no one to know of it; yet He could not escape notice.... 7:31 And again He went out from the region of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis. (NAS) Editor's comment: Note carefully, Kornform has switched to the NASB 1977 version. Matthew 15:21 And Jesus went away from there, and withdrew into the district of Tyre and Sidon....15:29 And departing from there, Jesus went along by the Sea of Galilee, and having gone up to the mountain, He was sitting there. (NAS) Gary<<Second, Mark no where states as Kornform "alleges" that Jesus went to Tyre and then Sidon to the North and then back to Tyre and then Sidon. Dr. Kornform 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.>> Kornform: Baloney. The NAS which you use has Mark saying Jesus went to Tyre, left Tyre, went to Sidon and then to the Decapolis which is SOUTH OF TYRE. There is absolutely no reason to follow this route. My map in back of the NIV has coastal lowlands from Sidon to Tyre and all the way down to the latitude of Galilee with mountains to the east blocking both Tyre and Sidon except for the river Leontes. If one goes to the south of Tyre he reaches Ptolemais and by going east encounters few and lower hills to the goal of Galilee. Leaving Tyre go north to Sidon and THEN trying to get to Galilee is absurd; it is blocked by mountains all the way. Gary<<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 is wrong.>> Kornform: Clearly you are wrong. Not all editions has Mark using "the region of Tyre and Sidon. That is Matthew's fudging to correct Mark. Mark 7:24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. (NIV) Mark 7:24 And from there He arose and went away to the region of Tyre....(NAS) Will the "real" word of God stand up? Either the word "Sidon" is in the Greek manuscripts in this verse or it isn't. Apparently the expert translators of the NAS and the NIV thought it wasn't. Gary<<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 the Decapolis.>> Kornform: In the translations above that is not true. Gary<< 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 armies 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.>> Kornform: More baloney. The mountain range separating the Bekka valley is continuous north to south and separates Sidon from the valley. The easiest and logical way to get to Galilee is south from Tyre where the mountain range peters out allowing access to Galilee. Editor's note: I checked with the Embassy for Lebanon in Washington, D.C. and they have confirmed there is a pass in the Sidon Region. Gary<< Fourth, Dr. Kornform stated it was Jesus’ intention to go from Tyre to Galilee, but 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) >> Kornform: The absurd itinerary is the issue not any intentions which no one knows anyway. Gary<< After Jesus left Sidon and walked through the Bekka Valley, he came to the Sea of Galilee. At that point he could turn either to the West, 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. Blessings, Kornform: Mark 7:31 And again He went out from the region of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis. (NAS) Kornform: The NAS has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon to Galilee WITHIN Decapolis. Mark 7:31 Then Jesus left the vicinity of Tyre and went through Sidon, down to the Sea of Galilee and into the region of the Decapolis. (NIV) Kornform: The NIV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon to Galilee and THEN to the Decapolis. Editor's comment: Note carefully Kornform's misquote of Mark 7:31. The Sea of Galilee and Galilee are not the same. Galilee borders the sea on the Western side, whereas Decapolis is on the Eastern and Southeastern side. Additionally, no where does the Bible state Jesus went to Tyre. Mark 7:31 Again, departing from the region of Tyre and Sidon, He came through the midst of the region of Decapolis to the Sea of Galilee. (NKJV) Kornform: The NKJV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre AND Sidon THROUGH the Decapolis (which is SOUTH of Galilee) and then to Galilee. Mark 7:31 Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, through the region of the Decapolis. (RSV) Kornform: The RSV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon and then THROUGH Decapolis to the Sea of Galilee. Kornform: I won't go any further here as it is obvious that various translators, as well as Matthew, are all disagreeing with each other in their attempts to cover up Mark's absurd geography. You are too. Kornform: All my points stand. Mark was writing on his own, was not inspired by any perfect deity and was ignorant of Palestinian geography, which ignorance has set hundreds of worried apologists on correcting it ever since Matthew (No-Last-Name) tried. Eiraenae responds to Kornform on July 23rdJust a few remarks about Mark 7 Kornform <<Using the NAS Mark (No-Last-Name) says Jesus went to Tyre, then went north to Sidon then to the Sea of Galilee and then to the Decapolis.>> Wrong. The NAS translation of Mark 7:24 reads: >Jesus got up and went away from there to the region of Tyre.< Please note the crucial detail that Kornform conveniently leaves out. The NAS translation of Mark does NOT say that Jesus went to Tyre. Rather, it says that he went to the region of Tyre. That is a significant difference that MUST be taken note of, but which Kornform somehow misses. It is similar to saying that Kornform went to New York ... the STATE, not the City. Kornform<<Matthew, copying Mark, knew he had made a mistake and simply fudged a correction.>> How can Kornform possibly have knowledge of what Matthew actually "knew?" Kornform<<Mark says Jesus went to Tyre and Matthew says the "region" of Tyre and Sidon.>> Reread your NAS for Mark 7:24. While you're right when you say that the NASB for Matthew reads "the region of Tyre and Sidon," you're wrong regarding what the NASB reads for Mark. In all the translations I have, Mark 7:24 reads "region" or "boarder" ... same as in Matthew. As for the lack of "...and Sidon" in Mark 7:24, I don't know a lot about this but I can read the notes in my study Bible, and the notes there indicate that most manuscripts, as well as the oldest manuscripts, all read "and Sidon." I don't know why many translations leave it out. Perhaps someone else, who knows a whole lot more about the history of the bible, can help here? Kornform << Mark says left Tyre to go to Sidon and Matthew eliminates the mistake.>> Wrong. Mark says that Jesus left from the region of Tyre and went through Sidon and on to the Sea of Galilee. This would mean that Jesus, perhaps someplace north/east of Tyre, went to Sidon for some reason and, then, from there, left and traveled east and then south, through the valley that is visible on DrGary's map. Matthew leaves out any direct reference to going through Sidon but, rather, asserts that Jesus simply left "from there," the "there" being the "region of Tyre and Sidon." A close, careful reading indicates that there is NO direct conflict. That Matthew doesn't assert that Jesus went through Sidon in leaving the region does NOT mean that Matthew asserts that Jesus didn't pass through Sidon. It is simply lacking in Matthew's account. WHY it is lacking CANNOT be speculated about, NOR can it be just assumed. Kornform<<The NAS which you use has Mark saying Jesus went to Tyre,>> Wrong. At best, Kornform is being misleading ... at worst, he is being dishonest. The NASB does NOT say that Jesus went to Tyre. Rather, as the above quote PROVES, the NASB says that Jesus went to the "region" of Tyre. Again, that's similar to saying that Kornform went to New York ... the STATE, not the City. Kornform<<....went to Sidon and then to the Decapolis which is SOUTH OF TYRE.>> Correct ... but perhaps Jesus had some reason for going to Sidon? Perhaps he intended to return by a different route -- an eastern route -- and it would be necessary for him to go north to access that road? We may well be incapable of saying WHY Jesus went to Sidon, but we aren't at any liberty to just assume that Jesus didn't have a reason for doing that. Kornform<<There is absolutely no reason to follow this route.>> At least one good hypothetical reason occurs to me. Given what had happened earlier in chapter 7, it is reasonable to assume that Jesus may WELL have wanted to avoid the region of Galilee while, still, wanting to go to the region of the Decapolis. This would certainly be possible if he were to go due east from Sidon and then south, following the Jordan river. He might have also had some reason to go to Sidon before heading back southeast. Kornform<<My map in back of the NIV has coastal lowlands from Sidon to Tyre and all the way down to the latitude of Galilee with mountains to the east blocking both Tyre and Sidon except for the river Leontes. If one goes to the south of Tyre he reaches Ptolemais and by going east encounters few and lower hills to the goal of Galilee. Leaving Tyre go north to Sidon and THEN trying to get to Galilee is absurd; it is blocked by mountains all the way.>> Not if you go due east and THEN south. Kornform<<Clearly you are wrong.>> No, he wasn't. Kornform<<Not all editions has Mark using "the region of Tyre and Sidon. That is Matthew's fudging to correct Mark.>> According to the notes at the bottom of the page in my Bible, most copies of Mark's Gospel, including the two oldest copies as well as a majority of the later copies, include "and Sidon." And NO copy, nor any translation, says that Jesus went to just "Tyre" without qualifying it with a word that indicates "area" or "region" or "boarder" or "vicinity." Kornform<<Will the "real" word of God stand up? Either the word "Sidon" is in the Greek manuscripts in this verse or it isn't. Apparently the expert translators of the NAS and the NIV thought it wasn't.>> Well, all the notes I can see say that the vast majority of Greek copies, as well as the oldest copies, include "and Sidon." Gary<< 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 the Decapolis.>> Kornform<<In the translations above that is not true.>> Did you actually READ the text that I did? DrGary stated, precisely, what Mark and Matthew say regarding what Jesus did. You're wrong. Kornform<<The mountain range separating the Bekka valley is continuous north to south and separates Sidon from the valley.>> Not according to the maps I've seen. There IS a road due east out of Sidon. Editor's Note: We have to wonder if Kornform is looking at an ancient or modern road map of Lebanon. Kornform<<The absurd itinerary is the issue not any intentions which no one knows anyway.>> Indeed ... and, likewise, you do NOT know the intention of Matthew when he copies from Mark something slightly different from what Mark wrote. Kornform<<I won't go any further here as it is obvious that various translators, as well as Matthew, are all disagreeing with each other in their attempts to cover up Mark's absurd geography. You are too.>> How is it you can know Matthew's intentions? Kornform<<All my points stand.>> All your points fail. Eiraenae Dr Gary Responds:Kornform<< Gee, why would "Mark's" simple itinerary list the order of travel for Jesus as Tyre, THEN Sidon to the north, THEN back south to Tyre again, THEN to the Decapolis to the SOUTH of Galilee, THEN finally to Galilee when the intention of the trip was just to go to Galilee from Tyre? That's like wanting to go to St Louis from NYC via Montreal and then New Orleans. In the absence of any explicit reason for this absurd route many observers have concluded that "Mark," possibly writing from Rome (remember you admitted that) made mistakes in the geography of Israel/Palestine. Ooops, "God" made mistakes; I quite forgot that the absurd "Mark" is inspired by a perfect, uh, imperfect being.>> Gary<< Mark writes: From there He arose and went to the REGION of Tyre and Sidon. Mark 7:24. NKJ And Again He went out from the REGION of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis. Mark 7:31 (NASB 1995 Update) My response: On the surface, it would appear Dr. Kornform is correct and Mark did not know the area. However, when we take a closer look at the Scriptures, examine a 3D topographical map of the area, and the area under consideration, then Kornform's objection is seen to be completely without merit. First, both Mark 7:24-30 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.>> Kornform<<Yes there certainly is. Using the NAS Mark (No-Last-Name) says Jesus went to Tyre, then went north to Sidon then to the Sea of Galilee and then to the Decapolis. Matthew, copying Mark, knew he had made a mistake and simply fudged a correction. Mark says Jesus went to Tyre and Matthew says the "region" of Tyre and Sidon. Mark says left Tyre to go to Sidon and Matthew eliminates the mistake.>> BTW, Kornform No-Last-Name, surnames are not all that ancient. Mark 7:24 And from there He arose and went away to the region of Tyre. And when He had entered a house, He wanted no one to know of it; yet He could not escape notice.... 7:31 And again He went out from the region of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis. (NAS) Matthew 15:21 And Jesus went away from there, and withdrew into the district of Tyre and Sidon....15:29 And departing from there, Jesus went along by the Sea of Galilee, and having gone up to the mountain, He was sitting there. (NAS) Gary<< Second, Mark no where states as Kornform "alleges" that Jesus went to Tyre and then Sidon to the North and then back to Tyre and then Sidon. Dr. Kornform 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.>> Kornform<< The NAS which you use has Mark saying Jesus went to Tyre, left Tyre, went to Sidon and then to the Decapolis which is SOUTH OF TYRE.>> No Kornform, neither the NASB or the NASB 95 Update state Jesus went to Tyre. Read the verse carefully, it states he went to the REGION of Tyre. Neither does the NASB state Jesus left Tyre, rather it states he left the VICINITY of Tyre. Kornform<<There is absolutely no reason to follow this route. My map in back of the NIV has coastal lowlands from Sidon to Tyre and all the way down to the latitude of Galilee with mountains to the east blocking both Tyre and Sidon except for the river Leontes. If one goes to the south of Tyre he reaches Ptolemais and by going east encounters few and lower hills to the goal of Galilee. Leaving Tyre go north to Sidon and THEN trying to get to Galilee is absurd; it is blocked by mountains all the way.>> No, Kornform, one of the main routes was from Sidon through a pass into the Bekka Valley and then south. I have a map which shows the trade routes to prove it, and it will be posted on the net shortly. I have spent time in the area and know it well. A friend of mine in Israel, Col. Israel Kantor, Rtd., was commander of the Tyre Region when Israel invaded Lebanon a few years back. Sure there may be a mountain goat trail one could take over the mountain to go from Tyre to Galilee, but that would actually be much further and extremely difficult. I've humped many a mile over both mountains and down valleys when I was in Special Forces. I am an expert in land navigation and can tell by looking at a map which way is the fastest and easiest. Clearly the route down the Bekka Valley is the easiest. Gary<< 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 is wrong.>> Kornform<< Clearly you are wrong. Not all editions has Mark using "the region of Tyre and Sidon. That is Matthew's fudging to correct Mark.>> Sorry Kornform, but the best and earliest manuscripts list both Tyre and Sidon. I need to check with Rev Neal on this, but if I recall correctly Sidon is only missing in some texts after the 5th Century. Mark 7:24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. (NIV) Mark 7:24 And from there He arose and went away to the region of Tyre....(NAS) Kornform<<Will the "real" word of God stand up? Either the word "Sidon" is in the Greek manuscripts in this verse or it isn't. Apparently the expert translators of the NAS and the NIV thought it wasn't.>> Both Tyre and Sidon are in all the early and major manuscripts. Gary<< 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 the Decapolis.>> Kornform<< In the translations above that is not true.>> They state he left the VICINITY (REGION) of Tyre through Sidon. Gary<< 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.>> Kornform<< More baloney. The mountain range separating the Bekka valley is continuous north to south and separates Sidon from the valley. The easiest and logical way to get to Galilee is south from Tyre where the mountain range peters out allowing access to Galilee.>> No Kornform, Mt. Lebanon is 11,000 feet high in the area, but there is a pass though the mountain range. Gary<< Fourth, Dr. Kornform stated it was Jesus’ intention to go from Tyre to Galilee, but 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) >> Kornform<< The absurd itinerary is the issue not any intentions which no one knows anyway.>> I have no problem with the itinerary. Clearly Jesus took the best route. Gary<< After Jesus left Sidon and walked through the Bekka Valley, he came to the Sea of Galilee. At that point he could turn either to the West, 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 took the best route. Clearly, Jesus’ trip is accurately reported in the Scriptures, and Dr. Kornfrom is blatantly wrong on all points.>> Kornform: Mark 7:31 And again He went out from the region of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis. (NAS) Kornform<<The NAS has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon to Galilee WITHIN Decapolis.>> No, that is not what the NAS states. Neither states Jesus was in Tyre, nor do they state he was in Galilee. The text reads, Region of Tyre and Sea of Galilee. Tyre and the region of Tyre are not synonymous, and neither are Galilee and the Sea of Galilee. Mark 7:31 Then Jesus left the vicinity of Tyre and went through Sidon, down to the Sea of Galilee and into the region of the Decapolis. (NIV) Kornform<<The NIV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon to Galilee and THEN to the Decapolis.>> The NIV says no such thing. The vicinity of Tyre would not be Tyre. Mark 7:31 Again, departing from the region of Tyre and Sidon, He came through the midst of the region of Decapolis to the Sea of Galilee. (NKJV) Kornform<<The NKJV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre AND Sidon THROUGH the Decapolis (which is SOUTH of Galilee) and then to Galilee.>> Once again, the NKJV does not say Jesus went from Tyre. Mark 7:31 Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, through the region of the Decapolis. (RSV) Kornform<<The RSV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon and then THROUGH Decapolis to the Sea of Galilee.>> Again, the RSV does not say Jesus left Tyre. What happened to Galilee? Kornform<<I won't go any further here as it is obvious that various translators, as well as Matthew, are all disagreeing with each other in their attempts to cover up Mark's absurd geography. You are too. All my points stand. Mark was writing on his own, was not inspired by any perfect deity and was ignorant of Palestinian geography, which ignorance has set hundreds of worried apologists on correcting it ever since Matthew (No-Last-Name) tried.>> The point is you don't have any knowledge regarding the area we are discussing. Gary Editor's
Note: Kornform
posted many short responses on 7/23 attempting to bury his errors. This is a
tactic used by hyper-skeptics whenever they have been clearly defeated on an
issue. Kornform's response 1:Gary<<No, Kornform, one of the main routes was from Sidon through a pass into the Bekka Valley and then south. I have a map which shows the trade routes to prove it, and it will be posted on the net shortly. I have spent time in the area and know it well. A friend of mine in Israel, Col. Israel Kantor, Rte., was commander of the Tyre Region when Israel invaded Lebanon a few years back. Sure there may be mountain goat trail one could take over the mountain to go from Tyre to Galilee, but that would actually be much further and extremely difficult. I've humped many a mile over both mountains and down valleys when I was in Special Forces. I am an expert in land navigation and can tell by looking at a map which way is the fastest and easiest. Clearly the route down the Bekka Valley is the easiest.>> I note the lack of published references for this claim. Kornform's response 2:Gary<< Sorry Kornform, but the best and earliest manuscripts list both Tyre and Sidon. I need to check with Rev Neal on this, but if I recall correctly Sidon is only missing in some texts after the 5th Century.>> Unevidenced assertion. Kornform's response 3:Mark 7:24 Jesus left that place and went to the vicinity of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know it; yet he could not keep his presence secret. (NIV) Mark 7:24 And from there He arose and went away to the region of Tyre....(NAS) Kornform<<Will the "real" word of God stand up? Either the word "Sidon" is in the Greek manuscripts in this verse or it isn't. Apparently the expert translators of the NAS and the NIV thought it wasn't.>> Gary<<Both Tyre and Sidon are in all the early and major manuscripts....>> Kornform<< Unevidenced assertion.>> You have not posted proof of your expertise in reading early and major manuscripts, not have you posted evidence that you have actually read them. Kornform's response 4:Gary<< 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 the Decapolis.>> Kornform<<In the translations above that is not true.>> Gary<< They state he left the VICINITY (REGION) of Tyre through Sidon.>> Not all the translations are in lockstep on this issue. Which one is the inerrant word of God? Anyone can go through dozens of translations and pick the one(s) that seem to support their case. I can do the same. It's sad isn't it that an omniscient and omnipotent god would have so many varied and conflicting translations about which tend to confuse rather than clarify? Some say "region of Tyre" and some say "region of Tyre and Sidon." Well which is it Gary? At any rate, Gary, advise us as to the one true translation of the word of God, accompanied by evidence. Thanks. Kornform's response 5:Gary<< No Kornform, Mt. Lebanon is 11,000 feet high in the area, but there is a pass though the mountain range.>> Kornform<<I don't see your topographical map with AOL 3.0.>> What's to the east of Ptolemais to the south of Tyre (which doesn't exist! LOL. My map show low mts and many valleys. My topographical map in my NIV shows high mountains between Sidon and Paneas (Caesarea Philippi) at the head of the valley labeled Ulatha containing the river Jordan north of Galilee. So it's my map against yours. Which one is the true inerrant map of God? Kornform's response 6:Gary<< I have no problem with the itinerary. Clearly Jesus took the best route.>> You have not proved your case at all. Kornform's response 7:Mark 7:31 And again He went out from the region of Tyre, and came through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, within the region of Decapolis. (NAS) Kornform<<The NAS has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon to Galilee WITHIN Decapolis.>> Gary<< No, that is not what the NAS states. Neither states Jesus was in Tyre, nor do they state he was in Galilee. The text reads, Region of Tyre and Sea of Galilee. Tyre and the region of Tyre are not synonymous, and neither are Galilee and the Sea of Galilee.>> I agree they are not synonymous, but the issue is the presence or absence of the accompanying word "Sidon" which varies from translation to translation, proving the word of God, a perfect being, is at variance with itself, and hence cannot be the word of a perfect being. If Jesus was 1 inch outside the city limits of Tyre then he was essentially in Tyre or so near it as to not make any difference at all, whilst being technically in the "region" of Tyre. So it is possible that I am for all practical purposes correct in saying he went from Tyre to Sidon, if that were the case. (Don't I think like a fundie? LOL) Moreover we see Jesus going away from his destination in some editions which is absurd in view of the topography which is illustrated in my authoritative NIV. After all, my NIV says "Holy" in gold letters in the front, so it must be Godly. Kornform's response 8:Mark 7:31 Again, departing from the region of Tyre and Sidon, He came through the midst of the region of Decapolis to the Sea of Galilee. (NKJV) Kornform<<The NKJV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre AND Sidon THROUGH the Decapolis (which is SOUTH of Galilee) and then to Galilee.>> Gary<<Once again, the NKJV does not say Jesus went from Tyre.>> OK, it is a metaphor or poetic usage which really means "Tyre" as he was 1 millimeter outside the city limits. Moreover the Holy text does not mention Sidon, so the others that do are at variance with it. That being the case, God, a perfect being, could not have inspired clashing texts. Editor's Note: Decapolis is east of the Sea of Galilee. Only one city in Decapolis, Beth-Shean, is on the west bank of the Jordan River and south of Galilee. Kornform's response 9:Mark 7:31 Then he returned from the region of Tyre, and went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, through the region of the Decapolis. (RSV) Kornform<<The RSV has Mark say that Jesus went from Tyre to Sidon and then THROUGH Decapolis to the Sea of Galilee.>> Gary<< Again, the RSV does not say Jesus left Tyre. What happened to Galilee?>> Same answer as before. This word of God says Jesus went THROUGH Decapolis to the Sea of Galilee and the others say the opposite. Which one is correct? Gary's response:Gary<< No Kornform, neither the NASB or the NASB 95 Update state Jesus went to Tyre. Read the verse carefully, it states he went to the REGION of Tyre. Neither does the NASB state Jesus left Tyre, rather it states he left the VICINITY of Tyre.>> Kornform<< Region of Tyre, or Tyre, Sidon was left out. Some translations include the region of Tyre and others say the region or Tyre and Sidon. BTW, how did they know it was the region of Tyre when Tyre was supposed to have been wiped off the surface of the earth centuries before, never to be found again, according to Ezekiel? LOL>> The Bible also says it shall be a place for the spreading of fishermen's nets, which clearly implies fishermen will be in the area. This has certainly come true. As to the city of Tyre, the old mainland city has never been rebuilt, and the island city is nothing more than a fishing village. Certainly Tyre has never regained her former glory. Kornform<<Something is fishy. Either Mark (NO-Last-Name) wrote the word Tyre alone or he wrote the words Tyre and Sidon. Which was it?>> The earliest and best manuscripts clearly show Mark used the words Tyre and Sidon, which agrees with Matthew. Dr. Gary Butner Rev Neal's textual analysis of the Mark 7:24 passage resulted in another debate with hyper-skeptic Joseph Crea. See Mark 7:24 - Skeptic Neglects to Respond
|
|
Send mail to
DrGary777@aol.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
