[ Return to The Pub ]
Posted by Vince on 2/2/2009, 9:02 pm, in reply to "Re: Decapolis"
Yes, it helps a lot. Thank you very much, Pope!
The most I could find is that the region appeared to be a neutral zone respected by all parties. Kind of like Switzerland in WW2.
Yet, we know that DECLARING neutrality means nothing if someone takes a notion to overrun you anyway. So it seemed rather mysterious to me.
I suspect it WAS observed as a kind of experiment to a certain extent but the populace evidently wasn't unprepared either (if they were descendants of Greek soldiers). Kind of like, "enter at your own risk."
Kind of strange for a world of that time. Especially when you consider the lengths that the Roman army went to, to conquer Masada ....... why would they leave Decapolis to its own devices?
In light of that information, it puts a bit of a different slant on Saul's alleged foray into Damascus to round up Christians as well. They would have been on to him like a dirty shirt in no time flat. How dare him violate a neutral territory?
And then another thing I've puzzled about as well.....
In 2 Cor. 11:32 Paul says, "In Damascus the governor under Aretas the king kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, desirous to apprehend me"
What was Aretas -an "Arabian" king- doing up in Damascus, anyway?
Well, if Decapolis was an experimental region, possibly the 'county' of Damascus had hired on or was being protected by a mercenary garrison supplied by one of the international armies ..... kind of like a UN peace-keeping force. If that were the case then yes ...... if Paul had come to Damascus to persecute Christians or to bounty hunt Christians, it makes sense that the army charged with protecting that county WOULD try to round him up.
-Vince
Message Thread:
« Back to thread