Didn't the population shifting of the Romans including the census debacle make this a silly question?
No
I'm sorry but I'm not aware of the old pre-existing nations being much of an issue about who is who in Judea in Christ's time...
If that were true, then every gospel mention of ethnicity loses much of its significance. The Good Samaritan loses. So too does the account of the woman at the well.
...and I'm saying that with a master's in NT background and several decades reading since.
I do not care.
That's a very foolish, self-aggrandizing, fallacious
appeal to authority. There are a lot of very intelligent, very practiced, and very well-educated Christians in this forum, so let me encourage you to NEVER think the letters after a name have any worth here. Maybe someday in the future we'll assemble all the educated folks so we can all whip out our bona fides and see who can pee the furthest. We'll all bow down to that guy and consider every word he posts the measure of all we have to say
. Until then, certainly, someone with a "Masters in NT background" knows the importance of...
Philippians 2:3-7
Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.
Assume everyone is reading the posts with humility and Php. 2:3 in mind.
I'm not aware of the old pre-existing nations being much of an issue about who is who in Judea in Christ's time...
Why then does scripture mention any of it? Certainly, there were a variety of people from the northwest and southwest in Israel. Aside from the Roman Centurion, why is it only those ethnicities within Israel are mentioned in the gospels. No Greeks, Egyptians, Ethiopians, barbarian, Gauls, etc.
- Why was the Canaanite woman's ethnicity mentioned if it wasn't relevant?
- Why the Centurion's?
- Why did Jesus compare the Canaanite woman to a dog?
- Why mention her being a dog and not a member of the house of Israel?
- What is the relevance in mentioning the ethnicity of the woman at the well?
- Shall we look first to scripture for those answers, or extrabiblical sources?
The Old Testament informs the New Testament, and the best first tool for interpreting scripture is scripture itself. That's Hermeneutics 101!
Considering that 4 empires have swept the area, since the Davidic reign and the Macs, I think the place is a jumble of foreigners.
(josh shakes head)
So much for bloodline!
The Jews worked at ethnic purity and considered it with hubris ("
we have Abraham as our father")? Hundreds of years in foreign lands and four empires sweeping the area didn't adulterate the Jewish bloodline. Neither was it the main cause of Jerusalem's diversity (and it was diverse). What made Jerusalem diverse was its position as a hub in the international trade routes. That position brought people from all over the (known) world to Israel and Jerusalem.
But that has nothing to do with the Canaanite woman to whom Jesus would say, "
I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." If those words are true and that "
only" is to be taken as a command from his Father, then Jesus disobeyed his Father and abdicated his ability to be the foreknown perfect sacrifice. Jesus compares her to a
dog! If she wasn't a dog, then he just violated a host of Mosaic Laws and his own teachings and thereby again rendered himself unable to be the sinless sacrifice. Jerusalem was ethnically diverse..... but
the house of Israel was homogenous.
I think the place is a jumble of foreigners.
"
Foreigners" isn't the question. At Passover and Pentecost Jews from every nation assembled in Jerusalem. All of them from foreign lands, but all of them Jews. Not Canaanites. Canaan was in Israel! Jesus was in the region of Tyre and Sidon and the Canaanite woman was from that area. Jesus was the foreigner! The Canaanite wasn't a foreigner in the land, but
she was not of the house of Israel. The Centurion was (in all likelihood) a foreigner in the land AND not of the house of Israel. The fact of the text is it makes note of her ethnicity, and
it does so for a reason - even in a city that was a jumble of foreigners.
Or maybe God inspired the authors to put a few unnecessary and meaningless words in His gospels like, "
Canaanite".
Considering that 4 empires have swept the area, since the Davidic reign and the Macs, I think the place is a jumble of foreigners.
So..... on one hand I am supposed to think there aren't any pagan or Gentile ethnicities in Israel because the Maccabeans purged the land BUT on another hand, I'm supposed to believe four empires (three of which swept through Israel before the Maccabean purge) jumbled what was purged? Which is it? Was it purged or jumbled?
That's a lot of mistakes in one post (one question and two sentences)! I'll do this: if you acknowledge in writing your errors thinking your Masters makes a difference and scripture mentioning Old Testament ethnicity didn't matter then I'll delete this entire post. No excuses, defenses, ifs, and, or buts. Brief and concise. Do that and I'll delete the entire post. I'll check back in the morning.