God’s Mighty Acts in Exodus: The Pillar of Cloud and Fire (Exodus 13:21-22)

Introduction

After the ten plagues Pharaoh finally released the Israelites from captivity, including over 600,000 men (20 years old and above), women, children, and a “mixed multitude” of non-Israelites (= over 2 million people), plus their belongings, provisions, flocks, herds, and livestock (Ex. 12:37-38; cf. 30:14; 38:26).

If we allow merely two square feet per person, the mass of people alone would have covered nearly 92 acres. Every time they set up camp, it would have required an estimated area of nearly 750,000 acres and approximately 4,000 tons of firewood. Each day the people (not counting the animals) would have needed about 1,500 tons of food and around 10.8 million gallons water.

Now Moses was educated “in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Acts 7:22),¹ one of the most developed civilizations at the time, including significant advances in mathematics and geometry. If Moses had calculated the logistics involved in the enormous task set before him, no wonder he made excuses! But from the very beginning God promised, “I will certainly be with you …” (Ex. 3:12).

The Route Taken 

The first leg of their journey was from Rameses to Succoth, then on to Etham (Ex. 12:37;13:20). [For a detailed itinerary of the entire trek, see Num. 33:1-49]. Since they were headed to “wilderness” rather than a heavily traveled region, with place names varying, changing, and disappearing through the centuries, it is extremely difficult if not impossible to now trace their route. Other than traveling eastward, at least three general routes have been proposed (northern, central, and southern), with multiple alternative possibilities included.

Far more important than geographical specificity is the One directing the way: “So God led the people …” (Ex. 13:17-18). From a mere human perspective, the shortest, quickest, easiest way was northeastward, along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. But this was the “way of the land of the Philistines” (v. 17), a trade and military route controlled by the Egyptians, which would have left the Israelites susceptible to inevitable conflict (cf. 14:10). Instead God led them in a more grueling direction, the “way of the wilderness of the Red Sea” (v. 18). God’s way is not always the easiest, but it is always the best!

About four centuries earlier, Joseph (at age 110) prophesied that God would lead his people out of Egypt to the Promised Land, and Joseph’s “bones” (or mummified body) were to be taken with them (Gen. 50:22-26). Joseph’s words were spoken “by faith” (Heb. 11:22), based on the revelation and promise of God. It is amazing that this was not only remembered but kept four centuries later (Ex. 13:19). Traveling from Rameses to Succoth to Etham, they set up camp “at the edge of the wilderness” (Ex. 13:20).

God Takes the Lead

“And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so as to go by day and night. He did not take away the pillar of cloud by day or the pillar of fire by night from before the people” (Ex. 13:21-22). Note how God leads through various means: Moses (3:10; 32:7; 33:1) and Aaron (6:26-27), an Angel (14:19; 23:20-23; 32:34), and a pillar of cloud and fire (13:21-22).

The “pillar of cloud” and “pillar of fire” appears to have been a single pillar rather than two (cf. Ex. 14:24; Num. 9:15-16). The word translated “pillar” essentially refers to a “column” (something that stands upright); not a funnel cloud but more cylindrical. It led them “by day and night” (Ex. 13:21), not that they journeyed 24/7 but during periods when temperatures were most conducive to travel, avoiding extreme heat. The desert region east of Egypt (part of the Sahara Desert – the world’s largest hot desert) has an arid climate with comparatively little rainfall. God directed his people in this manner “throughout all their journeys” (Ex. 40:38).

The Fourfold Purpose of the Pillar of Cloud and Fire

 

·      Reassurance (Deut. 31:6): a perpetual sign of God’s presence (note Ex. 3:12).

·      Guidance (Ex. 13:21): it would hover over the area they were to set up camp and move on when it was time to leave, sometimes overnight, a couple of days, a month, or a year (Num. 9:15-23). 

·      Provision (Deut. 2:7): they lacked nothing. They were led to places in the wilderness where necessary resources were available or provided.

·      Protection (Ex. 14:19-20, 24-25, 30-31): when the Egyptian armies pursued, the Lord through the pillar stood between his people and their enemies.

Lessons to Learn²

·      God’s way is not necessarily the easiest way but is always the best way (Prov. 3:5-6).

·      God still offers guidance and the assurance of his abiding presence (Psa. 119:105; Heb. 13:5).

·      God will not allow us to face anything that cannot be overcome (1 Cor. 10:13; Heb. 13:6).

·      God still provides (Phil. 4:19).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are from the NKJV.

     ² In Isaiah 4:2-6, in the context of warning the people of Judah of impending judgment (ca. seven centuries before Christ), there is hope for the future in the Messianic Age. Just as God was with his people in the days of the Exodus in the pillar of cloud and fire, so he is always with and provides for his faithful ones.

*Originally developed for an adult Bible class at the Estes church 26 June 2022.

Related Posts: Moses: a Husband of Blood

 

Image credit: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_pillar_of_fire,_by_Paul_Hardy.jpg

Moses: a Husband of Blood

A brief and obscure episode in Moses’ life is recounted in Exodus 4:24-26. After forty years in the land of Midian, Moses was sent by the LORD back to Egypt to lead the Israelites out of bondage, initially taking his wife Zipporah and his two sons, Gershom and Eliezer (Ex. 2:11–4:20; cf. 18:2-6; Acts 7:22-36).

“And it came to pass on the way, at the encampment, that the LORD met him and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son and cast it at Moses’ feet, and said, ‘Surely you are a husband of blood to me!’ So He let him go. Then she said, ‘You are a husband of blood!’—because of the circumcision” (Ex. 4:24-26, NKJV).

Commentary

Zipporah was a Midianite of the lineage of Abraham through his second wife Keturah (Gen. 25:1-4; Ex. 2:15-21). Presumably the Midianites were also amenable to the covenant of circumcision that God had instituted with Abraham and his descendants (Gen. 17:1-14). Zipporah’s father was the “priest of Midian” (Ex. 2:16; 3:1; 18:1) who acknowledged and served the LORD (Ex. 18:10-12, 19-23). However, at some point the Midianites drifted away from the monotheistic faith of their ancestry and served other gods (Num. 25:2). They became enemies of the people of Israel, luring them into sexual perversion and idolatry (Num. 22:1-6; 25:1-18; 31:1-18; cf. Judg. 6:1-10, 14).

The fact that Moses was in danger of being struck down by the LORD suggests he had been negligent in observing the whole counsel of God. The words and actions of Zipporah reflect her contempt for a divine ordinance, regarding it as abhorrent rather than a solemn act of obedience. Seeing that only one of their two boys was circumcised on this occasion, the other son had likely been circumcised already, provoking the ire of Zipporah and thus influencing Moses to then appease his wife rather than the LORD.

As the recognized leader of God’s people, it was imperative for Moses to be an example of obedience and faithfulness, even in what might seem to be the smallest matters. Moses would go on to write: “You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength. And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children …” (Deut. 6:5-7a). Moses’ life was spared when the law of God was obeyed, enabling him to continue his mission and be the instrument through whom the LORD would accomplish incredible things. 

Lessons to Learn

Apostasy is a gradual process. It starts with what may appear to be “the little things,” digressing from and thereby straining God’s will and favor until complete estrangement results (cf. Rev. 2:4-5). Whether spiritual degradation occurs within one’s lifetime or over generations, apostasy is a great tragedy with everlasting consequences for all who go astray (cf. 2 Pet. 2:18-22).

Concerning the divine will, we must avoid trivializing, compromising, or disregarding what might be perceived as merely “minor” elements. While certain aspects of biblical teaching are “weightier” than others, “These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone” (Matt. 23:23).

It is vital that we exercise diligence in knowing, observing, and defending the whole counsel of God. “He who is faithful in what is least is faithful also in much; and he who is unjust in what is least is unjust also in much” (Luke 16:10).

It is dangerous to think we know better than God. Whether or not we understand, like, or agree with what the Bible says, we must trust that God’s revealed thoughts and ways are infinitely higher than ours (Isa. 55:8-9). “Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth” (Col. 3:2).

Our circle of influence matters. “Do not be deceived: ‘Evil company corrupts good habits’” (1 Cor. 15:33). This is especially true with respect to whom we choose to marry. Spousal influence can draw us closer to God or lead us farther away (cf. Gen. 26:34-35; Deut. 7:3-4; 17:17; 1 Kings 11:1-3).

Conclusion

While circumcision is no longer enjoined under the new covenant of Jesus Christ (Acts 15:1-5, 24; Gal. 5:1-6; 6:15), the overarching principle of humble submission to the divine will still holds true (Acts 5:29; Rom. 2:4-11; 6:16-18). Let us be committed to trusting and obeying the Lord in all things, no matter how trivial and insignificant it may seem from a worldly perspective.

--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts: Premarital Decisions, The Pillar of Cloud & Fire 

Related articles: Steve Higgenbotham's Anatomy of a Backslider 

 

Image credit: adapted from https://www.fadajbcezeonwumelu.com/the-skin-of-his-face-shone-because-he-had-been-talking-with-god-exod-3429/

A Legion of Demons, a Herd of Swine, an Unlikely Missionary

Jesus, having begun his public ministry in his home environment of Galilee, eventually directed his attention eastward to the Decapolis region on the other side of the Sea of Galilee (Matt. 4:25; Mark 5:20; 7:31). The ten cities of the Decapolis were established as Greek municipalities following the 4th-century-BC conquests of Alexander the Great, at various times controlled and influenced by the Greek Ptolemies, the Greek Seleucids, the Hellenized Hasmoneans, and finally the Romans. In the early 1st century AD this was a predominantly Gentile territory comprised of Hellenistic centers in a Greco-Roman environment.¹

Unfamiliar Surroundings

Recounted in all three Synoptic Gospels (Matt. 8:28-34; Mark 5:1-20; Luke 8:26-39), fairly early in his ministry Jesus and his disciples ventured to the eastern coast of the Sea of Galilee in mid-western Decapolis to a place his fellow-Jews would have considered unclean, with unclean animals and unclean people tormented by unclean spirits. Upon exiting the boat they were immediately encountered by two extremely fierce demon-possessed men (Matt. 8:28). One of them, apparently more dominant, vocal, or notorious and eventually humble and receptive, is singularly featured in the accounts of Mark and Luke.²

A Seemingly Insurmountable Challenge

While both men were demon-possessed, the main character was inflicted by a plurality of “demons” (Mark 5:12; Luke 8:27, 35, 38), identified as “the unclean spirit” and “the demon” (Mark 5:2, 8; Luke 8:29), but also “the unclean spirits” (Mark 5:13) and “many demons” (Luke 8:30). The plural-singular variation is probably indicative of multiple spirit beings with a chief spokesman operating through a single host.³

The term “legion” [λεγεών] (Mark 5:9, 15; Luke 8:30) is descriptive of a division of the Roman army of approx. 3,000–6,000 soldiers, probably used here hyperbolically (“a large number”) and therefore not intended as an exact figure. It is also possible that the evil spirits were employing the exaggerated expression and its military implications as a desperate attempt to intimidate Jesus and the disciples.

The Impact of the Lord’s Presence

The demoniacs lived among the tombs, at least one of whom exhibited supernatural strength and barbaric behavior. He was “from the city,” perhaps Gergesa or one of the larger Decapolis cities,⁴ and “wore no clothes” (Luke 8:27). To describe his reaction to Jesus, Mark employs the verbal προσκυνέω (Mark 5:6), sometimes rendered “worship” (ASV, N/KJV). The only other occurrence of this word in Mark’s Gospel depicts insincere “worship” done mockingly (Mark 15:19). The prospect of authentic devotion is precluded by Luke’s parallel description using the verbal προσπίπτω  (Luke 8:28): he merely “fell down before” Jesus evidently out of fear rather than genuine reverence (contrast Matthew 14:33). 

Jesus is recognized as “Son of the Most High God” (Luke 8:28). These satanic forces understood Christ’s power to “torment” or “afflict” or “punish” [βασανίζω] them (Matt. 8:29; Mark 5:7b),⁵ i.e., to send them into the “abyss” or “unfathomable deep” [ἄβυσσος] far away from the natural world (Luke 8:31).⁶

The Problem Resolved

That a verbal exchange ensued after Jesus had ordered the demons out indicates stubborn resistance. Just as there are different types of people (cf. Mark 4:15-20), apparently there were different kinds of evil spirits, some of which were more obstinate than others and much more defiant (cf. Mark 9:17-18, 26, 29). Knowing they could not withstand the Lord’s power, to avoid the fate of disembodiment the demons requested reassignment to a nearby herd of pigs. 

Only Mark gives the number of swine, “about 2,000” (Mark 5:13). These were unclean animals according to the Jewish Law and forbidden as a food source (Lev. 11:7-8; Deut. 14:8). Whether those who owned and herded the pigs were nominal Jews, violating the law to which they were amenable,⁷ or more likely Gentiles, they were not only exposing themselves and others to heightened health risks⁸ but were disregarding the religious and cultural sensibilities of their conservative Jewish neighbors. Moreover, the Greeks regarded pigs to be among the more cost-efficient sacrifices in their cultic rituals (remember the profane pig sacrifice of Antiochus IV Ephiphanes that led to the Maccabean revolt).

Jesus freed the demoniac, his colleague, and the community of this horrific affliction, while purifying the entire area by casting unclean spirits in an unclean place into unclean animals that all drowned in the Sea of Galilee (cf. Isa. 65:1-7). The demonic forces appear to have been responsible for the destruction of these animals, perhaps a last-ditch effort to shift the blame to Jesus and impede his ministry by turning the community against him. If such a large number of swine were needed for pagan sacrifices, the cruel and sacrilegious ritual was dealt a crushing blow.

The Aftermath

Word quickly spread and a crowd of curious spectators soon gathered to find their infamous neighbor “sitting [at Jesus’ feet], clothed, and in his right mind” (Mark 5:15; Luke 8:35). Rather than relieved and appreciative, however, they were afraid and pleaded with Jesus to leave their vicinity (Mark 5:15-17; Luke 8:37a). They apparently preferred pork, profit, and evil over compassion and spiritual redemption. 

The Lord respected their wishes and departed, but not before making another attempt to reach their souls. He was not ready to give up on these unreceptive, albeit confused, people. Instead, he leaves behind an unlikely missionary, the one who had for a long time been terrorizing the region as a tomb-dwelling, chain-breaking, unclothed, demon-possessed wild man (Mark 5:18-20; Luke 8:38-39). Even though he had no theological training or evangelistic experience, he did have a story to tell. The Lord had monumentally changed his life, so he simply proclaimed throughout the city and surrounding region “how much Jesus had done for him” (Mark 5:20; Luke 8:39).

Despite the initial rejection, Jesus later returned to the Decapolis region to do many good works. This time the people warmly received him “and they glorified the God of Israel” (Matt. 15:29-31; Mark 7:31-37). What made the difference?

Conclusion

Jesus had led his disciples well beyond their comfort zone to unfamiliar surroundings where his message of repentance and hope was needed just as much as in their home environment. He showed compassion to a couple of social outcasts and freed them from the clutches of Satan, and at least one of them was grateful. But the rest of the community proved to be unreceptive and resistant. Nevertheless, Jesus still cared. He left behind a missionary, not a religious professional but one of their own, living proof of the Lord’s transformative power. And Matthew would later report that among Christ’s many followers were those of “the Decapolis” (Matt. 4:25). 

Lessons to Learn

·      Jesus has authority and power over the forces of evil.

·      Jesus offers love and compassion to those who are otherwise unlovable and seemingly undeserving. 

·      The Lord does not passively wait for sinners to come to him; he takes the initiative.

·      Humans have been created with free-will agency and are not forced by their Creator to accept and submit to his will.

·      Those resistant to the gospel still deserve a chance to hear it, some even more than once.

·      Sharing my faith can be as simple as telling others what the Lord has done for me.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ S. Thomas Parker, “The Decapolis Reviewed,” JBL 94.3 (Sept. 1975): 437-41.

     ² Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation. See K. L. Moore, “Synoptic Confusion: Matthew’s ‘Two’ vs. Mark and Luke’s ‘One’?” Moore Perspective (2 Jan. 2019), <Link>.

     ³ This may also demonstrate the incongruent tension between physical and malevolent spiritual realities.

     ⁴ See K. L. Moore, “Geographical Confusion: the Land of Demon-Possessed Pigs?” Moore Perspective (6 June 2022), <Link>.

     ⁵ Cf. 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6; Rev. 20:10. 

     ⁶ Cf. Rev. 9:1, 2, 11; 20:1-3.

     ⁷ These were the kind of Jews the Pharisees would have regarded as “sinners” (Matt. 9:10-13; 11:19; Mark 2:15-17; Luke 5:30-32; 7:34; 15:1-2), also subject to Paul’s indictment, “through the transgression of the law you dishonor God, for, as it is written, ‘through you the name of God is blasphemed among the nations’” (Rom. 2:23b-24). In Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son, feeding pigs was the absolute rock bottom, which, incidentally, was in “a distant land” (Luke 15:13, 15). Note also Isa. 66:3, 17; Matt. 7:6; 2 Pet. 2:22.  

     ⁸ Trichinosis is a parasitic disease caused by eating undercooked meat, particularly pork. There are also a number of pork-related food poisonings caused by bacterial contamination.

Related Posts: Demons & Demon Possession; Geographical Confusion: Land of Demon-Possessed Pigs; Beyond the Jordan: an Ethnogeographical Study

 

Image credit: adapted from <https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-tools/booklets/what-does-the-bible-teach-about-clean-and-unclean-meats/a-telling-event-from-jesus-christs-ministry>

 

Geographical Confusion: the Land of Demon-Possessed Pigs?

Fairly early in his ministry Jesus and his twelve disciples ventured to the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee and encountered a Legion of demons and their reluctant hosts.¹ All three Synoptic Gospels report this incident in great detail but are confusingly obscure about the specific geographical location (Matt. 8:28-34; Mark 5:1-20; Luke 8:26-40). Was it the land of the Gadarenes or the Gerasenes or the Gergesenes? While the townships of Gadara, Gerasa, and Gergesa are assumed, these communities were considerable distances apart in various proximities to the Sea of Galilee.

Textual Variation²

Variant readings among extant manuscripts occur in each Synoptic account. In Matthew 8:28 most manuscripts read “Gergesenes,”³ although the weight of textual evidence supports “Gadarenes,”⁴ while a number of ancient versions favor “Gerasenes.”⁵ In Mark 5:1 and Luke 8:26 and 37 the majority of manuscripts read “Gadarenes,”⁶ yet  “Gerasenes” is better supported by the weight of textual evidence,⁷ and “Gergesenes” is another variant reading.⁸

Geographical Probability

Gadara (modern-day Umm Qais in NW Jordan) was about 6 miles (9.6 km) from the Sea of Galilee, and Gerasa (modern-day Jerash in N. Jordan) was approximately 37 miles (60 km) away. Closer to the coast was Gergesa, which would explain why Origen (ca. 184-253), Eusebius (ca. 260-339), and later copyists preferred this particular location.⁹ Archaeologically identified as the lakeside village of El Kursi (in Israeli controlled Golan Heights), it more readily corresponds to the Gospel accounts: “they sailed down” to this area (Luke 8:26) and were encountered “immediately” once exiting the boat (Mark 5:2). The site also has nearby tombs and a steep bank descending to the shore (Matt. 8:28, 32; Mark 5:2-5, 13; Luke 8:27, 33).¹⁰

Why the Geographical Confusion?

The incident occurred in the greater Decapolis region (Mark 5:20), where both Gadara and Gerasa were among the league of ten cities (Pliny, Natural History 5.16). None of the Synoptic authors names a particular city. They each speak of the χώρα (“country” or “region”) of a much broader territory incorporating and surrounding these municipalities, where the Gadarene, Gerasene, and Gergesene peoples all lived.

Although Gerasa was the farthest away from the sea, it was the largest and better known.¹¹ Mark and Luke both allude to “the country of the Gerasenes” as a geographical marker that would have been more familiar to their respective non-Jewish audiences living far away and unacquainted with the area. While Gadara was smaller and lesser known, Matthew writes to a Jewish audience somewhat familiar with the region, so he can be more defined with reference to the Gadarenes. In fact, Josephus reports that this territory reached to the “frontier” or “coast” of the water boundary (Life 9.42). And if variant readings are afforded any level of credence, all three Synoptic authors would be even more precise than most modern versions indicate.

Conclusion

At first glance the textual, intertextual, and geographical discrepancies give the appearance of inaccuracy and disharmony among the Synoptics. However, geographical specificity does not seem to be the intent of the respective authors. The general area on the eastern coast of the Sea of Galilee in mid-west Decapolis is clearly in view (Mark 5:13, 20). Alert readers recognize that Jesus is venturing into predominantly Gentile territory and thus laying the groundwork for his eventual call to make disciples of all nations.¹²

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Matthew records two demoniacs, one of whom would have been the more dominant or notorious figure who became the Lord’s emissary, singularly featured in the accounts of Mark and Luke. See K. L. Moore, “Synoptic Confusion: Matthew’s ‘Two’ vs. Mark and Luke’s ‘One’?” Moore Perspective (2 Jan. 2019), <Link>.

     ² See P. W. Comfort, A Commentary on the Manuscripts and Text of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2015): 141, 183-84, 217-18; B. M. Metzger, Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1994): 18-19, 72, 121. 

     ³ The Byzantine Majority Text and Textus Receptus; cf. Darby, JUB, LSV, N/KJV, WEB, YLT.

     ⁴ NA²⁷ and UBS⁵; cf. ASV, CSB, ESV, NAB, NASB, NET, NIV, NLT, N/RSV.

     ⁵ Latin Vulgata Clementina; cf. Douay-Rheims, ISV, Finnish Bible (1776), Latvian NT. This is probably a case of scribal harmonization with the parallel accounts in Mark and Luke.

     ⁶ The Byzantine Majority Text and Textus Receptus; cf. Darby, JUB, LSV, N/KJV, WEB, YLT.

     ⁷ NA²⁷ and UBS⁵; cf. ASV, CSB, Douay-Rheims, ESV, ISV, NAB, NASB, NET, NIV, NLT, N/RSV.

     ⁸ Fourth/fifth-century Codex Washingtonianus.

     ⁹ Origin, Commentary on John 6.24; Eusebius, Onomasticon 73.14. See T. J. Baarda, “Gadarenes, Gerasenes, Gergesenes and the ‘Diatessaron’ Traditions,” in E. E. Ellis and M. E. Wilcox, eds., Neotestamentica et Semitica: Studies in honour of Matthew Black (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1969): 181-197.

     ¹⁰ C. A. Evans and S. E. Porter, eds., Dictionary of New Testament Backgrounds (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2000): 97; Joel Marcus, Mark 1–8 AYB (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008): 27:342; John McRay, Archaeology and the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008): 166-168; W. Sanday, Sacred Sites of the Gospels (Oxford: Clarendon, 1903): 27; Vassilios Tzaferis, “A Pilgrimage to the Site of the Swine Miracle,” BAR 15 (1989): 48. Thanks to the research of Colt Mahana, “Healing of the Gerasene Demoniac (Mark 5:1-20),” FHU BIB 515: Synoptic Gospels (9 April 2022): 1-15.

     ¹¹ D. M. Doriani, “Matthew,” in I. M. Duguid, J. M. Hamilton, Jr., and J. Sklar, eds., ESV Expository Commentary (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2021): 8:143 n.140; C. S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2014): 139.

     ¹² See K. L. Moore, “Beyond the Jordan: an Ethnogeographical Study,” Moore Perspective (9 June 2021), <Link>.

Related Posts: Legion of Demons, Herd of Swine, Unlikely Missionary

 

Image credit: adapted from <https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Map-of-the-Decapolis-region_fig1_30843902>