I have been reading Luke 19 etc over the Easter period.
Looking at the events I see that when Jesus was in Bethany he said "Come let us go now to Jerusalem"
Looking at subsequent events:-
Because of threats to his life, Jesus withdraws to Ephraim to the north of Jerusalem (Jn 11:54)
He then crosses the River Jordan and works in Perea There he blesses the little children and speaks to the rich young man
[23] Jesus now travels towards Jerusalem for the last time (Mt 20:17; Mk 10:32; Lk 18:31). Passing through Jericho he heals one (or two) blind men (Mt 20:29; Mk 10:46; Lk 18:35) and converts Zacchaeus the tax collector (Lk 19:1).
Now several Bible commentaries make mention of the fact that in Luke 19 v 1, it says "Jesus must go through Jericho", and saying this was especially to meet Zacchaeus.
I do not want to doubt this fact, but is the natural explanation the fact that He was in Perea and therefore Jericho was on the direct route back to Jerusalem.
If that is the case, why did he go from Ephraim , to Perea? This seems to be the "out of the way" bit?
Finally, how many miles did Jesus detoourtake him out of the way?
Looking at the events I see that when Jesus was in Bethany he said "Come let us go now to Jerusalem"
Looking at subsequent events:-
Because of threats to his life, Jesus withdraws to Ephraim to the north of Jerusalem (Jn 11:54)
He then crosses the River Jordan and works in Perea There he blesses the little children and speaks to the rich young man
Now several Bible commentaries make mention of the fact that in Luke 19 v 1, it says "Jesus must go through Jericho", and saying this was especially to meet Zacchaeus.
I do not want to doubt this fact, but is the natural explanation the fact that He was in Perea and therefore Jericho was on the direct route back to Jerusalem.
If that is the case, why did he go from Ephraim , to Perea? This seems to be the "out of the way" bit?
Finally, how many miles did Jesus detoourtake him out of the way?